text:
|USFDC Home
Material Information
Record Information
This item is only available as the following downloads:
|Full Text
xml version 1.0 encoding UTF-8 standalone no
record xmlns http:www.loc.govMARC21slim xmlns:xsi http:www.w3.org2001XMLSchema-instance xsi:schemaLocation http:www.loc.govstandardsmarcxmlschemaMARC21slim.xsd
leader ntm 22 Ka 4500
controlfield tag 008 s flunnn| ||||ineng
datafield ind1 8 ind2 024
subfield code a C01-00058
2 110
University of South Florida. Center for Urban Transportation Research
0 245
Escambia County Area Transit (ECAT) Pensacola urbanized area transit improvement strategy
Tampa, Fla
b Center for Urban Transportation Research (CUTR)
c 1995 February
Local transit--Florida--Escambia County--Pensacola--Finance
Urban transportation --Florida--Escambia County--Pensacola-- Finance
Transportation -- Florida -- Escambia County--Pensacola
1 700
Hinebaugh, Dennis
Hill, Eric
Hagge, Joe
Happel, Shelly
Dieringer, Suzanne
Catala, Martin
Becker, Janet
Robinson, Mary Bo
Kamp, Nilgun
Perk, Victoria
Rahimi, Rebecca
Williams, Kristine
Boyle, Daniel K.
Pensacola Urbanized Area Metropolitan Planning Organization
Escambia County Area Transit (ECAT)
t Center for Urban Transportation Research Publications [USF].
4 856
u http://digital.lib.usf.edu/?c1.58
ESCAMBIA COUNTY AREA TRANSIT PENSACOLA URBANIZED AREA TRANSIT IMPROVEMENT STRATEGY Prepared for : Pensacola Urbanized Area Metropolitan Planning Organization Pensaco la, Florida Prepared by: Center for Urban Transportation Research University of South Florida Tampa, Florida CUTR FEBRUARY 1995
Pensacola Urbanized Area Metropolitan Planning Organization 3435 N. 12th Avenue Pensacola, Florida 32503 (904) 444-8910 Suncom 693-8910 (904) 444-8967 Director, Transportation Planning: Michael W. Zeigler Project Manager: Mary Bo Robinson Center for Urban Transportation Research University of South Florida 4202 E. Fowler Avenue, ENB 118 Tampa, Florida 33620-5350 (813) 974-3120 Suncom 574-3120 Fax (813) 974-5168 Director: Gary L. Brosch Project Manager: Daniel K. Boyle Project Staff: Eric Hill Dennis Hinebaugh Victoria Perk Kristine Williams Martin Catala Suzanne Dieringer Joe Hagge Shelly Happel Nilgun Kamp Janet Becker Rebecca Rahimi
TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS List of Figures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ix List of Tables . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xiii Executive S ummary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ES-1 ECAJ" Ridership Survey . . . . . . . . . . . . . . E S-3 Interviews With Key Local Officials . . . . . . . . . ES4 Vehi cle Size . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ES-5 Route Productivity Evaluation . . . . . . . . . . . . . ES-6 Service Performance Standards . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ES7 Part 1: Chapter 1: Chapter 2: Service Plan ................... : .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ES-8 Implementation Plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ES-23 Transit Strategies for the Congestion Management Plan . . . . . ES-25 Land Use and Activity Center Strategies . . . . . . . . . . ES-25 S hort Term S trategies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 ECAT Ridership Survey . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 System Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 Survey Methodology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 Data Entry and Processi ng .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 8 Response Rates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 Survey Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 System Profile Demographic I nformat i on . . . . . . . . . 12 Age . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 Gender . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 Ethnic Origin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 Annual Income . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 Vehicle Ownership . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 TABLE OF CONTENTS
Chapter 3: Chapter 4: PENSACOLA URBANIZED AREA TRANSIT IMPROVEMENT STRATEGY Demographic Comparison of ECAT Users and Escambia County . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Demographic Comparison of ECAT Surveys .............. . System Profile Travel Behavior .......................... Trip Origin/Destination .......................... .... Mode of Access/Egress ......... .................... 14 14 20 20 20 Fare Category . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 Fare Payment Method . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 Frequency o f Ridership . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 Reasons for Using Transit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 Travel Alternatives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 Length of Transit U sage . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 Travel Behavior Comparison of ECAT Surveys . . . . . . 26 System Profile User Satisfaction . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30 User Satisfaction Comparison of ECAT Surveys . . . . . . . 31 Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44 ECAT Operator Survey . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44 Interviews with Key Local Officials in Escambia County . . . . 47 Perceptions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47 Policies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49 Improvements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53 Analysis of Light-Duty Buses and Vans vs. 30-foot Buses in Fixed-Route Revenue Service . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57 Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57 Issues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58 Definition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58 F actors to be Considered . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61 Vehicle Operating Costs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62 Vehicle Cost/Lifecycle Costs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63 Vehicle Passenger Capacities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64 TABLE OF CONTENTS
TABLE OF CONTENTS ChapterS: C hapter 6 : Maximwn Load Point and Scheduling . . .. . . . . . . . 64 Route Alignm ent . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65 Distance betwee n Stops . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65 Spare Parts Inventory . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67 Training and Operation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67 Fuel C ost s, Capacity/Range . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67 Frequency of Repairs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68 ADA Concerns . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68 Farebox Location/Ease of Use . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68 Boarding and Alighting Time . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69 Safety .............................. ............. 69 Public Perception .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 69 Image o f the Transit S ystem . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69 Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70 ECA T Prod uctivity Evaluation . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73 P r oductivity Measures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75 Product ivity Evaluation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 78 Ind ividual Route Evaluation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 4 P r oductivity Eva l uation for Saturday Service . . . . . . . . . 120 Deve lo pmen t of Performance S tandards . . . . . . . . 123 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 123 Examples of Service Performance Standards . . . . . . . . . 124 Hartline . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 124 PSTA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 125 Taltran . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 125 Cotrar\ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . 126 MDTA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 126 Summary of Service G u idelines . . . . . . . . . . . . 128 Application of Service S t andards to ECA T . . . . . . . . . . 129 TABLE OF CONTENTS
Chapter 7: Chapter 8: Part II: Chapter 9: P ENSACOLA URBANIZED AREA TRANSIT IMPROVEMENT STRATEGY Application to Goals, Objectives, and Standards in L ong Range Plans . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 134 Proposed ECAT Service Plan . . . . . . . . . . . . 135 Census Tract Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 135 Populatio n and Employment T rends . . . . . . . . . . . 140 Specific Route Recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . 143 Cost and Ridership Estimates . . . . . . . . . . . . . 158 ECAT's Funding Structure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 160 Available Transit Assistance Funding Sources . . . . . . 162 Federal Funding Sources . . . . . . . . . . . . . 162 State Funding Sources . . . . . . . . . . . . . 162 Local Fun ding Sources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 164 Multi-jurisdictional Transit Authority . . . . . . . . . . . 165 Proposed ECAT Implementation Plan . . . . . . . . . . 169 Marketing Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 169 Capital Plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 174 Implementation P lan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 175 Fleet Composition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 175 Routes and Schedules . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 176 Marketing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 177 Long-Term Strategies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 181 Transit Strategies for Congestion M anagemen t . . . . . . . I 83 Congested Corridors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Transit Strategies ........ ......... .................. Expansion of the Transit Network ...................... Improved Frequency .............. . ............... High-Occupancy Vehicle Lanes ............... .... T 't Am u ranst em es .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. Service Delivery Mixes/Innovative Services ................ 184 184 193 194 195 196 197 TABLE OF CONTENTS
TABLE OF CONTENTS Swnmary of Proposed Transit Networks for the Years 2000, 2005, and 2020 . . . . . . . . . . . . 197 Other Strategies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 199 Transportation Demand Management . . . . . . . . . . 199 Transit-Friendly Lan d Use . . . . . . . . . . . . . 200 Access Manageme n t . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 200 Swnmary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 200 Chapter 10: Land Use and Activity Center Strategies . . . . . . . . . 201 Appendie es: Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 I How Land Use Influences Transit . . . . . . . . . . . 202 Density and Traffic Congestion . . . . . . . . . . . . 202 Transit, Connectivity, and the Land Use Mix . . . . . . . . 203 Transit and Community Character . . . . . . . . . . . 204 Land Use Transit and the Elderly . . . . . . . . . 204 Planning Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 205 Land U se Strategies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 209 Regulatory and Design Strategies . . . . . . . . . . . . . 210 Concurrency . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 219 I ntergovernmental Coordination . . . . . . . . . . . . . 220 Local Planning and Regulatory Programs . . . . . . . . . . 22 I Escambia County . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 221 Barriers to Transit-Friendly Development . . . . . . . . 223 City of Pensacola . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 223 Opportunit ies for Transit-Friendly Development . . . . . 2 23 Barriers to Transit-Friendly Development . . . . . . 225 Regional D e velopment Initiatives . . . . . . . . . . . . . 226 Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 227 229 Ap pendix A: ECAT On-Board Survey I nst rument . . . . . . . 231 Appendix B: Individual Route Profiles . . . . . . . . . . 235 Appendi x C: ECA T Operator Survey . . . . . . . . . . . 271 TABLE OF CONTENTS
PENSACOLA URBANIZED AREA TRANSIT IMPROVEMENT STRATEGY Appendix 0 : In terview Questions . . . . . . . . . . . . 279 Appendix E: Escambia County Census Tracts : Distributions and Scores 283 Appendix F: Legislation Related t o Regi onal Transportation Authorities 287 Appendix G: Samp l e Goals, O b j e ctiv es, and Policies that Support Transit . . . . . . . . . . . 297 Appendix H: Sources of Addi t ional lnfonnation . . . . . . . 303 TABLE OF CONTENTS
LIST OF FIGURES Figure i Figure ii Figure iii Figure iv Figure v Figure vi Figure vii Figure I Figure 2 Figure 3 Figure 4 Figure 5 Figure 6 Figure 7 Figure 8 Figure 9 Figure 10 Figure II Figure 12 Figure 13 Figure 14 Figure 15 Figure 16 Figure 17 Figure 18 Figure 19 Figure 20 Figure 21 F igure 22 F igure 23 LIST OF FIGURES Map of Escambia Population within One-Quarter Mile of the ECA T Network . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ES-1 0 Map of ECAT Transit Network and Transit-Dependent Tracts . . ES-11 Map of Proposed Route I . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ES-13 Map of Proposed Route 3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ES-15 Map of ECAT Routes Proposed Evening Service . . . . . . . ES-17 Map of Proposed Route 12 . . . . . . . . . . . . . ES-19 Map of Proposed Crosstown Route . . . . . . . . . . ES-21 Demographics System Total . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 Demographics ECAT and Escambia County Comparison ......... Travel Behavior . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Fare Category ........................... .... . Fare Payment Method .......................... ........ Frequency and Ridership ........................... .... Reasons for Using Transit .................... ........ Travel Alternatives for ECAT Riders ...... ............. Length of Transit Usage .................... . .... User Sati sfaction : Days of Service .................. . . User Satisfaction: Hours of Service .................. .... ... User Satisfaction: Frequency of Service ................ ..... User Satisfaction: Convenience of Routes . . . . . . . . . . User Satisfaction: Convenience of Routes ......... ... .... User Satisfaction: Travel Time on Bus ...................... User Satisfaction: Cost of Riding the Bus .................... User Satisfaction: Availability of Bus Route Information .......... User Satisfaction: Vehicle Cleanliness and Comfort .............. Uier Satisfaction: Operator Courtesy ........................ User Satisfaction: Safety on Bus and at Bus Stops .... . ........ User Satisfaction: Overall ECAT Service ......... . .... ..... Map of Eseambia County Area Transit Routes ............. . . ECA T Route Performance ........................... ... 17 21 23 24 25 27 28 29 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 74 80 LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 24 Figure 25 Figure 26 Figure 27 Figure 28 Figure 29 Figure 30 Figure 31 Figure 32 Figure 33 Figure 34 Figure 35 Figure 36 Figure 37 Figure 38 Figure 39 Figure 40 Figure 41 Figure 42 Figure 43 Figure 44 Figure 45 Figure 46 Figure 47 Figure 48 Figure 49 Figure 50 Figure 51 Figure 52 Figure 53 PENSACOLA URJJANIZED TRANSIT IMPROVEMENT STRATEGY Map of Route I East Pensacola Heights . . . . . . . . . . 85 Map of Route 2 Cordova Mali/P JC . . . . . . . . . . . . 87 Map of Route 3 Bayview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89 Map of Route 4 -T Street/Palafox . . . . . . . . . . . . . 91 Map of Route 5 Scenic Heights . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93 Map of Route 6 Alcaniz/Davis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 95 Map of Route 7 A and 7B Oakwood Terrace/Montclair . . . . 97 Map of Route 9 and 9S University Mall . . . . . . . . . 99 Map of Route lOAEnsley . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 101 Map of Route I OB Ensley . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I 03 Map of Route II Myrtle Grove . . . . . . . . . . . . I 05 Map of Route 12-Saufley/George Stone . . . . . . . . . . 1 07 Map of Route 13 -9th A venue/ Aragon Court . . . . . . . . . I 09 Map of Route 14 Naval Air Station . . . . . . . . . . . Ill Map of Route 15 Navy PoinVBarrancas . . . . . . . . . . 113 Map of Route 16 Palafox .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 115 Map of Route 18 Blue Angel Express . . . . . . . . . . . 117 Map of E CAT Coverage Area (One-Quarter Mile Buffer Around All Routes) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 133 Map of ECA T Transit Networ k and Transit-Dependent Tracts . . . 139 Map of Proposed Route I . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 144 Map of Proposed Route 3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 145 Map of Proposed Route 13 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 148 Map of Proposed Route 6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 150 Map of ECAT Routes Proposed Evening Service . . . . . . . 152 Map of Proposed Route 12 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 155 Map of Proposed Crosstown Route . . . . . . . . . . . . 157 Map of Existing Roadway Deficiencies and Transit Service Coverage Area . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 185 Map of Year 2000 Roadway Deficiencies (E & C) and Transit Service Coverage Area . . . . . . . . . . . . 187 Map of Year 2005 Roadway Deficiencies . . . . . . . . . 189 Map of Year 2020 Roadway Deficienc ies . . . . . . . . . 191 LIST OF FIGURES
LIST OF FIGURES Figure 54 Figure 55 Figure 56 Figure 57 Figure 58 Figure 59 Figure 60 Figure 61 Figure 62 Appendix A Vertical Mixing (Illustration) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 211 Redevelop Parking Areas to Increase Density (Illustration) . . . 212 Encourage Clustering of Buildings (Illustration) . . . . . . . . 214 Require Parking at the Side or Rear of Buildings (Illustration) . . . 214 Standards for Design of Bus Turnouts (Illustration) . . . . . . . 215 Transit Access in Residential Subdivisions (Illustrat i on) . . . . . 216 Coordinate Pedestrian Access with Bus Stops (Illustration) . . . . 217 Subdivision Design for Pedestrians (Illustration) . . . . . . . . 2 I 7 Transit-Oriented Development (TOO) (lllustration) . . . . . . . 218 Route I Demographics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 236 Route 1 Travel Behavior and User Satisfaction . . . . . . . 237 Route 2 Demograph ics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 238 Route 2 Trave l Behavior and User Satisfaction . . . . . . . 239 Route 3 Demographics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 240 Route 3 Travel Behavior and User Satisfaction . . . . . . . . 24 I Route 4 Demographics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 242 Route 4 Travel Behavior and User Satisfaction . . . . . . . . 243 Route 5 Demographics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 244 Route 5 Travel Behavior and User Satisfaction . . . . . . . . 245 Route 6 Demographics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 246 Route 6 Travel Behavior and User Satisfaction . . . . . . . 247 Route 7 Demographics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 248 Route 7 Travel Behavior and User Satisfaction . . . . . . . 249 Route 9 Demographics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 250 Route 9 Travel Behavior and User Satisfaction . . . . . . 25 I Route I OA Demographics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 252 Route I OA Travel Behavior and User Satisfaction . . . . . . . 2 5 3 Route lOB Demograph ics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 254 Route JOB Travel Behavior and U ser Satisfaction . . . . . . . 255 Route I I Demographics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 256 Route II Travel Behavior and User Sati sfact ion . . . . . . . . 257 Route 12 Demographics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 258 Route 12 Travel Behavior and User Satisfaction . . . . . . . 259 LIST OF FIGURES
PENSACOLA URBANIZED AREA TRANSIT IMPROVEMENT STRATEGY Route 13 Demographics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 260 Route 13 Travel Behavior and User Satisfaction . . . . . . . 261 Route 14 Demographics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 262 Route 14 Travel Behavior and User Satisfact ion . . . . . . 263 Route 15 Demographics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 264 Route 15 Travel Behavior and User Sat isfac tion . . . . . . . 265 Route 16 Demographics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 266 Route 16 Travel Behavior and User Satisfaction . . . . . . . 267 Route 18 Demographics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 268 Route 1 8 Travel Behavior and User Satisfaction . . . . . . . . 269 LIST OF FIGURES
List of Tables Table i Table ii Table iii Table I Table 2 Table 3 Table 4 Table 5 Table 6 Table 7 Table 8 Table 9 T able 10 Table II Table 12 Tab l e 13 Table 14 Tab l e 15 Table 16 Table 17 Table 18 Table 19 Table 20 Table 21 Table 22 Tab l e 23 LIS T OF TABL ES User Satisfaction : Overall ECA T Service . . . . . . . . . . ES-3 Application of Proposed ECA T Service Performance Standards . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ES-9 Proposed Changes for Escambia County Area Transit . . . . . ES-27 Response Rate by Question . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I 0 Percentage of Riders Included in Survey, by Route . . . . . . . II Demographic Comparisons with Escarnbia County . . . . . . . 16 Demographic Comparisons of ECAT Surveys . . . . . . . . . 18 Characteristics of 24.5-foot Diamond Coach VIP 2500E Bus . . . . 59 Characteristics of 15-foot Dodge Ram Maxi-van . . . . . . . . 60 Comparison of Characteristics of 30-, 24 5 and 15-foot Vehicles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61 Maximum Load Point . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66 Performance Input Variables FY 1994 . . . . . . . . . . . . 76 Performance Evaluation Measures FY 1994 . . . . . . . . . . 79 Example of Productivity Calculations . . . . . . . . . . . 81 ECA T Saturday Ridership . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 121 Performance Indicators and Service Guidelines . . . . . . . . 129 Application of Proposed ECA T Service Performance Standards . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 131 Transit Dependent Tracts I dentified in this Analysis and in the Escambia County Transit Development Plan . . . . . . . 138 Projected Percentage Increases in Population, 1992-2000 . . . . . 141 Projected Percentage Increases in Employment, 1992-2000 . . . . 142 Estimated Change in Service Levels Associated with Route ReviSions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 159 Cost and Rev e nue Impacts of Recommendations . . . . . . . . 160 ECA T Budgeted Sources of Operating Funding (FY 1995) . . . . 161 ECA T Requested Capital Grants (FY 1995) . . . . . . . . . I 6 I FOOT Schedule for Distribution of Block Grant Funds . . . . I 63 Forecast o f Tax Revenues for Escarnbia County . . . . . . . 164 LIST OF TABLES
Table 24 Table 25 Table 26 Table 27 Table 28 Table 29 Table 30 Table 31 Table 32 Table C-1 Table C-2 Table C-3 Tab l e C-4 Table C-5 Table C-6 Table E-1 PENSACOLA URBANIZED AREA TRANSIT IMPROVEMENT STRATEGY Forecast Revenues from a $0.05 Local Option Gas Tax in Escambia County . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 164 ECA T' s Florida Peer Systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 169 Peer Analysis Marketing Budgets FY 1995 . . . . . . . . . 170 Peer Analysis Marketing Budget per Rider . . . . . . . . . 173 ECAT Capital Acquisition Plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . 175 Proposed Changes for ECA T . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 198 Land U se/Transit Compatibility Matrix . . . . . . . . . . 206 Checklist: How Transit Friendly is Your Development Program? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 208 Land Use and Density Guidelines for Transit . . . . . . . . . 212 Most Frequent Passenger Complaints about ECAT Identified by Bus Operators ECAT Operator Survey . . . . . . . . 274 Improvement Areas for ECAT Identifi ed by Bus Operators ECAT Safety Problems Identified by Bus Operators ECAT . . . . 275 Operator Survey . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 276 Routes with Schedule Problems Identified by Bus Operators ECA T Operator Survey . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 276 ECA T Routes to Modify Identified by Bus Operators ECA T Operator Survey . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 277 Need for Night or Sunday Service . . . . . . . . . . . . 277 Escambia County Census Tracts: Distributions and Scores . . . 285-286 LIST OF TABLES
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Center for Urban Transportation Research (CUTR) at the University of South Florida has undertaken this study, Pensacola Urbanized Area Transit Improvement Strategy (TIS), at the request of the Pensacola Urbanized Area Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO). CUTR has worked previously with the MPO and with Escambia County Area Transit (ECA T) in the development of a five-year transit development plan, and is very familiar with transit issues and the ECA T system The purpose of this study is to develop short and long range strategies to maintain and improve transit service in Escarnbia County and the associated urbanized area. The study grew partly out of a concern on the part of the Escambia County Board of County Commissioners to ensure that subsidies for public transportation are being used to provide efficient transportation and mobility to all members of the public needing or desiring to utilize the service A second motivation for the study was the need to incorporate transit in the Pensacola Urbanized Area Transportation Study 2020 Plan Update, as required by the lntermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act (ISTEA) of 1991. The study has a short-term element and a long term component. The short-term element inc l udes a comprehensive operational analysis of existing ECA T service, and results in a series of recommendations for the near future (the period 1995 through 1999). The long-term component focuses on stra te gies for future improvements of transit service beyond the five-year time frame. The latter portion of this study interfaces with the transportation plan update, and recommendations made here are likely to be considered for the 2020 plan s Congestion Management System component. The long-tenn component also include s an examination of land use and activity center strategies and how these are related to the transit system The goal of the comprehensive operational ana l ysis is to identify service improvements, realignments, and adjustments that would improve the operating effectiveness and efficiency of ECA T routes and schedules. The scope of this study includes the follow in g objectives EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
PENSACOLA URBANIZED AREA TRANSIT IMPROVEMENT STRATEGY Recommend strategies to increase ridership. Recommend strategies to improve the operating efficiency and effectiveness of the ECAT fixed-route system, while remaining sensitive to existing financial constraints. Identify methods to improve, reorganize or expand public transportation services so that transit becomes a more attractive mode of travel. Identify opportunities to enhance the image of publ ic mass transit to artract new riders, especially choice or discretionary riders. Recommend the types of vehicles to be used in the deli very of services. Identify corridors and areas that will be well served by efficient public transportation and shared-ride opportunities due to current level of service deficiencies and the presence of employer and loca l government financial support for alternative transportation Identify opportunities to promote greater involvement of the private sector in the provision of public transportation services by contracting for services, utilizing employer-based user-side subsidies, and encouraging jointly funded programs. Review local and regional policies in an effort to create an environment within the lo cality's structure which will encourage the use and function of all modes of public transit. The short -term component of this study included a survey of current ECA T riders, interviews with key local officials, an analysis of the appropriate size for a transit vehicle in Eseambia County, a productivity evaluation of individual routes, development of service performance standards, a five-year transit service plan and an implementation plan. These elements are summarized below, and are presented in greater detail in Chapters 2 through 8 of the final report. The long-term component of this study forecasts the ECAT route network for the year 2020 and interim years, and identifies transit-related strategies for inclusion in the Congestion Management Plan. Land use impacts are also discussed, and land use and activity center strategies are presented Chapters 9 and 10 of the fmal report include the long-term elements of this study. EXECUTIVE SUM/IIARY
EXECUT/1/E SUMMARY ECAT RIDERSHIP SURVEY Chapter 2 of the final report addresses the results of the ridership survey. The survey of current riders found that ECA T ridership continues to be made up primarily of the transit-dependent, those who have no other alternative means of travel. Ridership is heavily weighted toward low income persons without access to a private vehicle. ECA T has had some success in amacting new riders. The Blue Angel Express in particular has amacted some higher-income riders who have other travel options available. Rider satisfaction has increased over the past two years for every element of service included in the questionnaire. The percentage of respondents who rate overall service as good or very good has increased from 73.0 percent to 82.6 percent (see Table i). Service elements with the most positive ratings include safety (90 7 percent good or very good), operator courtesy (90.2 percent) and vehicle cleanliness and comfort (87.0 percent). Respondents register the greatest dissatisfaction with hours of service (13.7 percent poor or very poor), frequency of service (12.9 percent) and convenience of routes (8.4 percent). These service characteristics also had high percentages of "fair" ratings. Even these characteristics with relatively low ratings have improved since the 1992 survey. Table i User Satisfaction: Overall ECA T Service Rating Current Survey Previous Survey (1994) (1992) Very Good 42.3% 32.0% Good 40.3% 41.0% Fair 16.0% 21.0% Poor 1.0% 4.0% Very Poor 0.4% 1.0% EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
PEJVSACOLA URBANIZED ARL! TRANSIT IMPROVEMENT STRATEGY INTERVIEWS WITH KEY LOCAL OFFICIALS Chapter 3 of the final report describes the findings of the interviews with key local officials. The following sununary regarding perceptions of and attitudes toward ECA T may be drawn as a result of the interviews with key local officials. Transit is a necessary service. Officials recognize that it is not a profitable operation, but that it has a role in the overall transportation network. Transit's role is limited. ECAT provides service to county residents who have no other means of mobility. The constituency supporting transit is also limited. Most interviewees would like to see the constituency broadened to include more middle-class commuters, but there is little willingness to provide additional local funding for the transit system. There is support for increased marketing activities The transit system is well-managed. There is a high degree of confidence in ECAT s management. Perceived shortfalls of the transit system are seen as a result of the environment in which transit operates (low density, little congestion, plentiful parking). Efficiency is a top priority. Officials need to know that the system is us i ng local tax dollars in an efficient manner. Awareness of and experience with transit is low. There are still misperceptions, such as that no one ever rides the buses and that ridership is composed exclusively of minorities. Local officials might benefit from a visit to the transfer center to observe operations. Making improvements to the system will be difficult. Transit is not a high-priority item among elected officials, except when funding pressures arise. Until the transit system has greater passenger support and more certain financial means at its disposal, it will be hard pressed to make improvements. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY VEHICLE SIZE Chapter 4 tackles the issue of appropriate size for transit vehicles in Escambia County. CUTR recommends that ECAT continue to purchase 30foot heavy duty buses for use in flxed-route service. The merits of transit veh icl e size periodically arise as an issue at most transit agencies. T ransit board members and citizens have asked the question of whether buying smaller vehicles would be more cost effective. Their reasoning is simple: smaller vehicles cost Jess to operate while still being able to serve the needs of the riding public. Three issues of primary importance in the comparison of smaller light duty buses and vans ver sus heavy duty 30-foot buses: cost; efficiency; and imag e and public perception I n analyzing costs some operating costs may be saved through fuel efficiency, but certainly not as much as one might imagine. The significant majority of the cost to operate a transit vehicle in fixed route service is the driver s wage and benefits, and this is not affected by vehicle size. The other major factor for total operating expenses is vehicle maintenance Due to the light duty nature of the smaller bus and van, it is expected that brake and transmission components would need to be replaced on a much shorter cycle than that for heavy duty buses Public perception related to the vehicle size and perceived lower operating costs remain very imponant factors when considering the purchase of smaller buses and vans for fixed route service. Clearly, no one wants to see empty 40-foot buses on the streets ofEscambia County. One danger in the use of smaller ligbt-duty vehicles is that public perception of transit can be quickly eroded by the impermanent appearance of these vehicles and potentially inferior service T here are several efficiency-related concerns connected with the use of vans or light-duty buses in fixed route service. The ability to standardize a fleet's parts inventory is very important when considering the purchase of vehicles. Standardized fleets a ll ow for a significantly smaller parts inventory, and tie up Jess capital dollars in parts. In addition a vehicle mix consisting of different buses and vans can limit scheduling flexibility. Restricted opportunities for interlining, or assign in g one vehicle to two or more routes, due to the lower passenger capacity of smaller buses and vans can result in reduced efficiency and increased operating costs. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
PENSACOLA URBANIZED AREA TRANSIT IMPROVEMENT STRATEGY Other issues which argue against the purchase of smaller light duty buses and vans for fixed route service include operator training, passenger comfort, vehicle safety and boarding and alighting times. While these issues affect all riders, vans in fixed route service may pose a particular hardship for the elderly. Smaller buses and vans can have a place in the provision of transit service, but maintenance, efficiency and public perception concerns noted above argue against their use in Escambia County. Thus, Chapter 4 concludes with the recommendation to continue the purchase of 30 foot buses for ECA T fixed route service. ROUTE PRODUCTIVITY EVALUATION Chapter 5 describes in detail the development of an evaluation procedure to measure performance of individual routes The procedure incorporates six productivity measures: revenue/cost ratio; revenue per revenue mile; revenue per revenue hour; passengers per revenue mile; passengers per revenue hour; passengers per trip. The evaluation process begins with the calculation of the six productivity measures by route and for the system as a whole. Then, for each individual measure, a route's performance is compared to the overall system performance. This comparison is done by taking the ratio of the route value to the system value. Once this process is completed for all six measures, a final score is calculated for each route as the average of the six performance ratios. A score of 1 00 means that the route's performance is on a par with the system performance. A score of greater than 1.00 represents above-average performance, while a score of less than 1.00 is below average. One advantage of this procedure is that it takes advantage of data already being collected for Federal Section IS reporting requirements. A disadvantage is that a breakdown of the data by weekday and weekend is not available. Chapter 5 includes a modified evaluation procedure for EXECUTIJIE SUMMARY
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Saturday service. Saturday ridership is most useful in estimating transit usage for non-work trips and the potential usage in off-peak time periods (such as evenings). SERVICE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS Chapter 6 takes the composite route scores, developed as part ofthe productivity evaluation, one step farther as the basis for developing performance standards for ECAT. The purposes of service performance standards are twofo l d. First, these standards e s tablish quantifiable measures that can be used to gauge the performance of an individual route. Second the standards provide a minimum acceptable performance level for a route on an objective basis. Standards are often seen as a means to make decision s about transit service based on performance criteria, with minimal reliance on the political process As part of the development of performance standards, CUTR reviewed service guidelin e s at other Florida transit systems. Most agencies have minimum standards based on a percentage of the systemwide av e rage on a particular i ndicator or g10up of indicators. This approach 1s recommended for ECA T. Chapter 6 includes the following major recommendations ECA T should use all six performance indicators in the route productivity evaluat i on as the basis for developing service performance standards. Table ii presents the productivity evaluation measures for all routes and for the system. ECA T should adopt performance standards calling for elimination or significant service reductions for any route with a total score less than 50 percent of the system average. ECAT should analyze routes with a total score between SO and 66 percent to identi f y ways to increase ridership or reduce costs associated with these routes. Service area coverage should be considered along with route performance in any decision to discontinue or significantly reduce service on a particular route. Figure i shows the coverage area, defined as the area within one-quarter mil e of a bus route for the current ECA T route network T he population within t he service area is II 0,232 or 41. 9 percent of the Escambia County population of 262 798. ECA T should continue to allowing new routes to operate for the length of time that they are funded before making a decisio n on whether to retain the new route as a permanent part EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
PENSACOLA URJJANIZED Ali.EA TRANSIT IMPROVEMENT STRATEGY of its service network. This is an WlStated policy, with exceptions for new routes that are clearly not close to meeting expectations. As shown in Table ii, Route 16 (Palafox/Downtown) is ranked ftrst by a wide margin. Other routes scoring above 1.25 include Route II (Myrtle Grove), Route 5 (Scenic Heights) and Route 15 (Navy Point/Barrancas Avenue). The poorest performer among the routes is Route 18, the Blue Angel Express The Blue Angel Express is properly viewed as a new type of service that will hopefully build a market over time; thus, its performance in FY 1994 should not treated in the same way as other routes. Two other routes scoring below 0.50 (Routes 8 and 17) have been discontinued as separate routes. Route I (East Pensacola Heights) is still in operation. The route productivity evaluation technique provides an objective means to assess the performance of individual routes within the context of the overall bus network. This evaluation might best be used as an "early warning system" indicating that there is a problem with a given route. Other factors that may be important in deciding on a course of action are the availability of alternate transit service along a route, the desired geographic area coverage, and the length of t ime the route has been operating. SERVICE PLAN Chapter 7 develops specific short-term route and service recommendations for the county's transit system. These recommendations are drawn in large measure from analyses io previous reports, especially the route performance evaluation and development of service guidelines. To determine areas of greatest need, CUTR performed a census-tract-level analysis of the propensity to use transit. Figure ii shows the areas with the greatest need for transit service io relationship to the existing route network. ExECUTIVE SUMMARY
EXEC:<-, w e SUMMARY T a b le i i A ppli catio n o f P r o posed ECAT S e ni ce Perfo r m a n c e Sta n dards R oute I Scor e Rou t e s Above Sys t em Ave rag e 16 Pa l afox!Oow n town 2.35 11 G r ove 1.38 5 Scen i c Heights 1 28 15 Navy P oii\V Bar
Figure i Escambia Population within 1/4 Mile of the ECAT Network 11l82 Conoua Trod-POjiUiation within Sevlee Aru(1 10,232)
Figure ii ECAT Transit Network and Transit f Tracts .1 E:a 4 $ $ 7A 78 9 $$ 10A 1108 11 .. 15 el16 18 Census Tracts p-I=-'
l'ENSACOLA URBANIZED AREA TRANSIT IMPROVEMEN T STRATE:GY CUTR utilized projected population and employment figures, developed as part of the long-range plan update, to assess the effect of existing trends on the t ransi t system Population projecti o ns suggest significant growth in Santa Rosa County and other areas outside of the existing service area. The employment picture for the year 2000 is more favorable to ECAT than the population projections. ECA T' s current service area is projected to contain over three-quarters of all jobs within the Pensacola urbanized area in the year 2000. Transit extensions should not be recommended solely on the basis of population projections, since there are unanswered questions regarding the types of residential developments, the location of the work place for these new residents, and the willingness or propensity to use transit. Because transit works best in concentrated, relatively dense areas, extensions of ser v ice to outlying suburban areas can weaken the transit network by dilu ting service where it is well used. Chapter 7 contains proposed route and service improve ments. These form the heart of the operational plan for ECA T Recommendations in clude: Restructure Routes 1 and 3 (Figures iii and iv); Straighten Route 13 along Ninth Avenue ; Restore midday service on Route 2; Adjust the Route 6 schedule, to depart from the transfer center on the hour in creasing the frequency of service in the neighborhoods served by both routes to one bus every 30 minutes; Shorten the turnaround path for Route 6 in downtown; Increase frequency of service on Route 11 to one bus every 30 minutes; Institute evening service on selected routes (Figure v); Split Routes 5 and 9 into separate routes; Restructure Route 12 (Figure vi), and consider implementing a crosstown route connecting Mobile Highway with the Cordova Mall area via Michigan Avenue and Brent Lane (Figure vii); The fisca l impact of all changes is a net increase in annual costs of $232,000 However, the costs of the two most expensive changes (increased frequency on Route II and evening service) are responsible for this increase. Without these two proposals, the net financial impact would be a slight reduction in costs. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Figure iii Proposed R oute 1 + z z ,... "11 z z !11 0 z "' a. --Current Route St --Proposed Route
This is a blank page
Figur e iv Prop os ed Rout e 3 + z. .., z z !!!. 0 z ., <.!l <.!l Pl .. til < a. z m --Current Route --Proposed Route
This is a blank page
--Figure v Escambia County Area I! $ 7A 78 9 $S lOA 108 11 12 13 I 1$ D Ewnlngs.Mc:.
This is a blank page
Or Fa i rflold Or Figure v i Proposed Route 12 - Current Route z ,. "' ----1 --Prop osed Route l----1
This is a blank page
+ Q) ::l 0 a: :. N L c: -> en en a, e -() u. "0 Q) en 0 Q. 0 .... a... Road Communjty Or Pine Forost Road
This is a blank page
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The fiscal impacts cited above are exclusive of any additional grants from any source Other sections of Chapt e r 7 discuss alternate funding options (for example, state Service Development Grants might provide 50 percent of the money needed for improved frequency and evening service), and also i nter-county arrangements used elsewhere in Florida for the provis i on of transit service. CUTR re(;Ommends that, when the time comes, ECAT and Santa Rosa County develop an agreement for the provision of multi-county trans i t service to be operated by ECA T, including provisions for funding of associated capital and operating costs. IMPLEMENTATION PLAN Chapter 8 is a summary o f the short-term element of this study Service and fleet composition recommendations are recapitulated, and a live year capital plan is presented. Marketing act i vities receive particular attention in this chapter. An implementation schedule is also suggested. Marketing a public transportation system is usually undertaken for several reasons. One is to increase awareness of the system as a travel alternative. A Se(;ond reason is educational, providing Specific information that peop l e need to know about the system in order to use it, such as destinations, schedules, fares, hours of operation and bus stop locations. A third reason is to inform riders and/or the general public about upcoming special promotions, a new service or changes to the s y s tem. Wh i le encouraging use of the system underlies all of these reasons, campaigns targ e ted to specific segments of the population (e g., shoppers, commuters, resident s in a particular neighborhood) is a fourth reason to market tran .sil In a society where travel is dominated by the automobile, the mere existence of a transit system is not sufficie n t to attract riders. This is particularly true in a locale such as Escambia County, where there are n o major parking or congestion problems. E CA T's I 994 Marketing Plan contained standard and innovative ideas on getting the w o rd out about transit and making ECAT more a part of the community. SCAT's marketing budget is at the low end of the range for systems within Florida in its peer group. CUTR recommends that ECA T moderate in the marketing budget as funding becomes a v ailable. CUTR also recommends that ECA T establish a transit pass commuter benefit program in 1995. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
PENSACOLA UIUJAJI/IZED AREA TRANSIT ltfPROVEMENT STRATEGY The capital plan anticipates a continuation of the bus replacement program, so that by FY 1997, ECAT will have 25 thirty-foot buses in its fleet. The original bus replacement schedule is still valid and should be followed With regard to service recommendations, the first step in implementation is to present the findings and recommendations at the Commissioners' Forum in February, 1995. CUTR will then make a presentation to the Pensacola Urbanized Area Metropolitan Planning Organization at its March meeting After the Co mmissioners and the MPO have been informed of these recommendations and hav e offered comments or revisions, ECA T should bold a public hearing on the package of route and schedule changes. Not all of the recommendations warrant a public hearing, which is generally required if more than I 0 percent of service on a route is affected, but it makes sense to include everything in the hearing so that the public is fully informed and has a chance to comment on each of the p roposals ECA T will then decide whether to imp l ement some or all of the recommendations, based on public reaction. Except for the increased frequency on Route II and evening service, the net fiscal result of the other recommendations is positive. Thus, the proposals for Routes I, 2, 3, 5, 6, 9, 12, and 1 3 can be implemented at the first opportunity after the public hearing. Route II and evening service will require Service Development funds from the state. ECAT should app l y for Service Development grants for both projects. Service Development money generally becomes availab le in July, and the application will need to be completed early in the spring. Because of the tight tim e frame, ECAT should prepare applications for both projects in advance of the public hearing, so that they can be submitted immediately (assuming a positive public response). In early 1996, ECAT should evaluate the performance of Routes I, 3, and 12, using the productivity evaluation model, and decide whether the routes warrant continuation: If the decision is made to add the crosstown route, ECA T should apply for Service Development funds for FY 1997 to institute crosstown serv ice. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TRANSIT STRATEGIES FOR THE CONGESTION MANAGEMENT SYSTEM Chapter 9 develops transit strategies to be included for evaluation as part of the Congestion Management System in the plan update. After listing congested corridors identified in the long range plan, CUTR identifies transit-related strategies to alleviate congestion, including: expansion of the transit network and service area; improved frequency; HOY corridors; increased transit amenities ; innovative service. Table iii summarizes proposed improvements to ECAT's system for the year 2020 and for the interim years 2000 and 2005. These changes to the ex i sting system represent the routes and frequencies needed as input to the long-range model. All improvements, including transit amenities, are included in Table iii. Actions beyond the fixed-route transit network, such as transportation demand management strategies, are also presented in this chapter. Inclusion of transit-specific goals, objectives and standards in the plan update would conform to the intent of ISTEA This would also provide a connection between the long-term transportation plan and the short-term plan for the transit system. LAND USE AND ACTIVITY CENTER STRATEGIES The final chapter in this report describes the relationship between land use and transit, and suggests initiatives that support regional transit service, reduce traffic congestion, and enhance community character. A partial listing of strategies and initiatives includes: tailor the planning and regulatory program to encourage transit-compatible development along strategic transit corridors ; designate and reinforce mixed-use activity centers; establish limits to comll)ercial strips; allow a finer mix of land uses; EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
PENSACOLA URBANIZED AREA TRANSIT IMPROVEMENT STRATEGY encow:age infill and relatively higher densities on transit corridors; link transit stops to subdivisions with pedestrian pathways; develop a coordination procedure to integrate transit considerations into development review; designate major acti vity centers as transportation concurrency exception areas. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Table iii P ro posed C h a n ges f o r C ounty Area Trans it Year Action R outes Affeeted Restructure Rout es I 3, 12, 13 Sp l it Loop into Two Rou tes 5 9 M i dday Se!Vice 2 Eveni n g SeNice 5 9, 1 1 1 3 1411 5 2000 Increased Freq u ency (2 b u ses per h o ur) 1 1 Michigan/Brent Crosstown Route Dow ntown a nd Beach T r o lleys New Buses SeNice Exte n s i ons : A i rport B l vd. Cross tow n Route Lillia n H i ghway Gulf Beach Highway Pensacola Beach/Gulf B r eeze UWF 9 9S 2005 Increased Freque n cy: 2 buses per hou r 5 1 4 12 t rips per day 18 Other. HOV Toll Booth Bob Sikes Bridge D owntown Center New Fa re Media Express Se!Vice : M i l ton/Pace via US 90 Avalon Park via 1 -1011-110 HOV Lan es: 1-10/1-110 Park and Ride Lo t s 2020 Circula t o r s : M i lton, Pace, Gulf Br e eze N orthWest Exte n sion alo n g U.S 29 10A 1 0B Increa sed Frequency: 2 buses per hou r 9, Michiga n/Bren t Crosstown 4 buse s per h o u r 16 E XECUTIVE SUMMARY
This is a blank page
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION Chapter 1 INTRODUCTION The Centef fof Urban Transportation Research (CUTR) at the University of South Florida has undertaken this study, Pensacola Urbanized Area Transit Improvement Strategy (TIS), at the request of the Pensacola Urbanized Area Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO). CU T R has worked previously with the MPO and with Escarnbia County Area Transit (ECAT) in the development of a five-year tfansit development plan, and is ver:y familiar with transit issues and the ECA T system. The purpose of this study is to develop short and long-range strategies to maintain and improve transit service in Escambia County and the associated urbanized area. The study grew partly out of a concern on the part of the Escambia County Board of County Commissioners to ensure that subsidies for public tfansportation are being used to provide effic ient transportation and m obility to all members of the public needing or desiring to utilize the service. A second motivation for the study was the need to incorporate transit in the Pensacola Urban ized Area Transportation Stu.dy 2020 Plan Up date, as required by the lntermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act (ISTEA) of 1991. The study has a short-term element and a long term component. The short-term element includes a comprehensive operational analysis of existing ECA T service, and results in a series of recommendations for the near future (the period 1995 through 1999). The long-term component focuses on strategies for future improvements of trans i t service beyond the five-year time frame. The latter portion of this study interfaces with the transportation plan update and recommendations made here are likely to be considefed for the 2020 plan's Congestion Management System component. The long-term component also includes an exam in ation of land use and activity center strategies and how these are related to the transit system. The goal of the comprehensive opefational analysis is to identify service improvements, realignments, and adjustments that would improve the operating effectiveness and efficiency of ECAT routes and schedules. The scope of this study includes the following objectives. PART 1: SHORT-TERM STRATEGIES
PENSACOLA URBANIZED AREA TRANSIT IMPROVEMENT STRATEGY Recommend strategies to increase ridership. Recommend strategies to improve the operating efficiency and effectiveness of the ECA T fixed-route system, while remaining sensitive to existing financial constraints. Identify methods to improve, reorganize or expand public transportation services so that transit becomes a more attractive mode of travel. Identify opportunities to enhance the image of public mass transit to attract new riders especially choice or discretionary riders. Recommend the types of vehicles to be used in the delivery of services. Identify corridors and areas that will be well served by efficient public transportation and shared-ride opportunities due to current level of service deficiencies and the presence of employer and local government financial support for alternative transportation. Identify opportunities to promote greater involvement of the private sector in t he provision of public transportation services by contracting for s ervices, utilizing employer-based user-side subsidies, and encouraging jointly funded programs. Review local and regional policies in an effort to create an environment within the locality's strucrure which will encourage the use and function of all modes of public transit. The long-term component of this study forecasts the ECA T route network for the year 2020 and interim years, and identifies transit-related strategies for inclusion in the Congestion Management Plan Land use impacts are also discussed, and land use and activity center strategies are presented. following this i ntroductory chapter, Chapter 2 presents the results of the ECAT ridership survey conducted in May I 994 and compares these results to an earlier survey done as part of the transit development plan in April I 992. Results of a survey of bus operators at ECAT are also presented in Chapter 2. Chapter 3 describes the interviews conducted by CUTR with key loc al officials from the public and private sectors in Escambia County. An analysis of the appropriate size of transit vehicle for use by ECA T is contained in Chapter 4. Chapter 5 evaluate s the productivity of EC A T routes and Chapter 6 uses the results of this evaluation to develop serv ice performance standards intended as a guide for ECA T in making serv ice decisions. Chapter 7 contains the proposed service plan for the transit agency. The final portion of the short-range element is in Chapter 8, the proposed implementation plan CHAPTER J: INTRODUCTION
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION The final two chapters of this report address the long-range component. Chapter 9 identifies transit strategies for inclusion in the Congestion Management Plan that is being prepared as part of the Pensacola Urbanized Area 2020 Plan Update. Chapter I 0 is a discussion of land use and activity center strategies to support public transportation. Each of the succeeding chapters in this report contain findings and recommendations that are important for an understanding of the current situation and the reasoning behind proposed changes. These findings and recommendations, intended to guide ECA T as it makes both short term and long-tenn improvements to the transit system, are summarized in the Executive Summary, contained at the beginning of this document and also published as a separate summary report. PART/: SHORT-TERM STRATEGIES
This is a blank page
CHAPTER 2: ECAT R IDERSHIP SURVEY Chapter 2 ECAT RIDERSHIP SURVEY INTRODUCTION In order to obtain information on the demographic characteristics, travel behavior patterns, and perceptions of current transit r iders, CUTR conducted an on-board survey on se lected ECA T routes on Tuesday, May 24 and Wednesday, May 25, 1994 Surveying was conducted between 12:00 p.m. and 6:00p.m. on the first day and between 5:00a. m and 12:00 p.m. o n the second day. Using this approach, the survey sample includod riders travelling to and from work as well as passengers using ECAT for non-work trips. A copy of the survey instrument is contained in Appendix A The major objectives underlying this effort include: to collect data useful in stra tegic and service planning ; to identify perceptions and attitudes about ECA T service; to establish demographic information on riders; to define travel characteristics and patterns of patrons; to provide an opportunity for ECAT patrons to voice their opin i ons on transit-related issues to ECA T management and decision makers; to measure changes in demographic characteris tics, travel patterns, and rider perceptions and anitudes since the last survey two years ago. The findi ngs of the survey are presented in two major categories. These categories are demographics and travel behavior/user satisfaction. A comparison of the current results and results of a previous survey conducted by CUTR two years ago is presented in each section. SYSTEM OVERVIEW ECA T is a fixed-route system consisting o f 18 routes. Most routes operate at a frequency of one bus per hour. Service is provided on Saturday for I 4 of the routes No service is available on PART/: SHORT-TERM STRATEGIES
PENSACOLA URBANIZED AREA TRANSIT IMPROVEMENT STRATEGY Sundays or holidays. The span of service is from 5:00a.m. to 7:00p.m. weekdays and 6:00a.m. to 7:00 p.m. on Saturdays. There is one limited-stop route, the Blue Angel Express, that serves three park-and-ride lots, Pensaco la Airport, and the Naval Air Station. All routes pass through the transfer center for convenience in transferring to other routes. The fare structure for ECAT service includes a base fare of $1.00 and a transfer fee of $0.10. Discounted fares are offered for students, senior citizens, and persons with disabilities. Monthly passes, weekly passes, and twenty ride tickets are available. Reduced-price passes for students, senior citizens, and persons with disabilities are also available. SURVEY METHODOLOGY For the on-board survey, CUTR selected bus runs at random from the ECAT schedule. A bus run is a collection of trips that makes up the bus operator's assignment. A trip is defined as a single journey beginning and ending at the Transfer Center, since ECAT s routes are strucrured as loops. Bus runs were used as the unit of sampling because it is much easier to assign a survey worker to a specific bus with a specific driver Runs were selected until at least one-half of all trips on each route were included in the survey The surveys were designed to be filled out on the bus and returned before the passenger left the bus. Workers conducting the survey included temporary help and graduate students from CUTR. A training session was held prior to surveying. At least one CUTR research associate was present at the Transfer Center at all times during the survey to answer questions or address problems. Data Entry and Processing All completed questions were included in the analysis regardless of whether the entire questionnair e was filled out. The surveys were reviewed by data entry staff who input responses into a dBasc format. These files were then reviewed and processed using the statistical software "SAS ... CHAPTER 2: ECAT RIDERSHIP SURVEY
CHAPTER 2: ECA T R IDERSHIP SURVEY Response Rates Generally, the res ponse rate was very good when compared with similar efforts undertaken on this type of service, and provides a very good information base for analysis. Approximately I 700 riders were asked to fill out a survey. I, 198 surveys were returned for a response rate of 70 percent. The presence of survey assistants who actively helped and encouraged riders to fill out the survey forms was a major factor in achieving this high response rate. Responses were subjected to weighting and factoring. This process results in numbers being produced that reflect actual ECAT ride r ship For example a high percentage of respondents on Route I completed surveys. When calculating overall system averages for factors like income and average age, th e fact that a greater share of Route I passengers completed a survey is taken into account so that the characteristics of these riders are not overstated in total system results. To calculate a weighted total response, each route was factored up to the actual ridership that was reported for that route on the days when the survey was conducted. ECAT ridership averaged 3,976 patrons per day over the two-day period while the s urvey resulted in a u sable sample of I, 198 surveys. Thus, the survey respondents accounted for thirty percent of the average daily boardings This is an increase from the previous survey in 1992, which included 25 percent of all trips The level of precision for a survey of this size is +/2.8 percent at the 95 percen t confidence level. A completed survey was not a requirement to be i ncluded in the surv ey results. All completed questions were included in the analysis, regardless of whether the entire survey was filled out. As a r e s u lt, sample response rates differ by question. A review of the percentage of respondents answering each question is provided in Table 1. Travel-related and basic demographic questions were answered by over 90 percen t of respondents. Only 70 percent answered the income q ues tion, which usually receives the poorest response in surveys of any type. Table 2 presents the percentage of total riders for each route inclu ded in the survey. These percentages were found to vary by ro ute. T his was not particularly surprising since the routes travel through different neighborhoods with varied socioeconomic characteristics, The total PART/: SHORT-TERM STRATEGIES
PENSACOLA URBANIZED AREA TRANSIT IMPROVEMENT STRATEGY number of surveys that were returned for each route is shown as a percent of the reported ridership on the days that the survey was conducted. Table 1 Response Rate by Question Question Rate 1 Is th i s the first survey you filled out today? 94% 2. Where did you start this trip? 98% 5. How did you get to the bus stop? 94% 7 What will you do when you get off th i s bus? 94% 8. Where are you going now? 96% 10. Which fare category are you in? 93% 11. How did you pay for your fare on this bus? 96% 12. How ofte n do you ride the bus? 94% 13. What i s the most important reason you ride the bus? 94% 14. How would you make this trip if not by bus? 94% 15. How long have you been using ECAT service? 92% 16. Your age is ... 94% 17. You are ... 93% 18. Your ethnic origin is . 93% 19 Your total annual househo ld income is ... 70% 20. How many cars are owned by your househo ld? 79% 21a. Days of service 85% 2 1 b. Hours of frequency 84% 21c. Frequency of service 82% 21d Convenience of routes (where buses go) 83% 21e Dependability of buses (on time ) 83% 211. Travel time on bus 83% 21g. Cost of riding the bus 82% 21h. Availability of bus ro ute information 81% 211. Vehicle cleanliness and comfort 83% 21j. Operator courtesy 83 % 21k. Safety on bus and at bus stops 82% 211. How would YOU rate overall bus service? 83% CHAPTER 2: ECAT RIDERSHIP SURVEY
CHAPTER 2: ECAT RIDERSHIP SURV E Y Table 2 Percutage of Riden Included in Survey, by Route Pereentage of Route Route Rldenihlp Route 1 East Pensacola Heights 83% Route 2 Cordova MaiVP JC 35% Route 3 Bayv iew 28% Route 15 Navy PoinVBarrancas 35% Route 4 T-StreeVPa l afox 63% RouteS Scenic HeightsiCordova Mall 14% Route 6 Alcaniz/Oavis 21% Routes 7 A 7B Oakwood Terrace/Montclair/Ebonwood 26% Routes 9 9S University MaiVUniversity of West Aorida 16% Route 10A Ensley 34% Route 10B Ensley 44% Ro u te 11 Myrtle Grove 32% Route 12 Saufley/George Stone 27% Route 13 9th Avenue/Aragon Court 29% Route 14 Nava l Air Station/Navy Boulevard 11% Route 16 Palafox 45% Route 18 Blue Angel Express 76% PART]: SHORT-TERM STRATEGIES
PENSACOLA URBANIZED AR TRANSIT IMPROVEMENT STRATEGY SURVEY ANALYSIS The survey analysis is presented in two parts The first part is a system profile that includes an analysis of the full results of the survey. Questions are grouped by category (demographies, travel behavior, and user satisfaction), and the responses t o each question are provided. The second part is a route-by -r oute profile and is presented in Appendix B. In general, the information provided includes a great deal of tabular and graphical information. Text is limited to introducing subjects and noting or interpre ting findings. The reader is enco u raged to use the table of contents and list of tables and figures for easy reference to a patticular subject. A description of the data provided in each subsection follows. Demographic information collected in this surve y include age gender, ethnic origin, household income, and auto ownership. These data enable ECA T to develop a demographic profile of its passengers. This kind of knowledge can be used in the design of marketing and information material and the identification of target audiences. Travel-related questions pro vide information such as trip origins/destinations and modes of access and egress This information contributes to effective scheduling, planning and service design and can influence policy decisions. Questions related t o fares and ridership patterns are also included in this category User satisfaction is determined through responses to questions rating various aspects of ECAT service. These ratings clearly reflect the perceptions of current riders. Aspects that passengers perceive as being "poor" can potentially be addressed through changes i n the system. By distinguishing rider sensitivities toward specific aspects of the system E CA T is better able to set priorities for system improvements. SYSTEM PROFILE Demographic Information Demographic-related questions include age, gender ethnic origin, annual household income, and vehicle ownership. Each of these questions is briefly discussed and the responses are presented in graphic form. Figure I shows demographic information for bus riders based on the weighted CHAPTER 2: ECAT RIDERSHIP SURVEY
CHAPTER 2: ECA.T RIDERSHIP SURVEY total response. Table 3 and Figure 2 compare demographic characteristics of ECAT riders and Escambia County's population, while Table 4 presents findings of this s urvey and the 1992 survey. Age Seventy-two percent of the survey respondents are between the ages 18 and 44 indicating that most ECA T patrons are of working age. Note that approximately nine percent of ECA T riders are over the age of 60. This i s an age group which normally represents a larger segment of the conventional t ransit market. Sixteen percent ofEscarnbia County's total population is over the age of 60. Gender Systemwide, more women use ECA T service than men Sixty-one percent of the sample respondents are women. This is typical of findings on gender for other systems. Ethnic Origin Approximately 66 percent of the sample respondents are African-American and 32 percent are white. A small percentage of survey respondents are Hispanic or "other African-Americans constitute only 20 percent of the tota l population of Escarnbia County. Annual Income Fifty-seven percent of sample re spondents report an income lower than $10,000, compared to 18 percent of all COWlty residents. An additional 23 percent report an income between $10,000 and $14,999. These figures are typical of most bus system riders. People who frequently use transit are usually in the lower-middle to lower income brackets. The very low household incomes for ECA T riders suggests that a large share of the rider ship is dependent on ECA T for mobility and may have few other transportation options. Vehicle Ownership Approximately 57 percent of the sample respondents do not own a vehicle. This is also typical of many conventional bus transit markets, and strongly suggests that a l arge proportion of ECAT ridership is a captive market, with no other choice but to use public transportation However it is interesting to note that 29 percent of the sample respondents have one automobile in their household. This would suggest that ECA T is attracting some residents who may have an automobile available. PART 1: SHORT-TERM STRATEGIES
PENSACOLA URBANIZED AR&t TRANSIT IMPROVEMENT STRATEGY Demographic Comparison of ECAT Users and Escambia County A demographic comparison between ECA T users and the Escambia County population is shown in Table 3. The data support findings that most riders come from lower income categories. While 57 percent of ECAT riders have household incomes under $10,000 only 18 percent of all County residents report incomes in this category. The data also indicate that only a very small segment of those within income categories $20,000 and above use transit in Escambia County. An observation of note in this demographic comparison is that, while African-Americans are only 20 percent of the County population, this ethnic group represents the largest group of ECA T riders (66 percent). This again is consistent with conventional wisdom regarding transit ridership and may be partly accounted for by socio-economic disparities between this group of county residents and the rest of the county population. Figure 2 presents side by side comparisoos of ECAT and Escambia County demographics Demographic Comparison of ECAT Surveys CUTR conducted an identical survey of transit users on Apr i l 22, 1992. Results from the two surveys can be compared to determine changes in transit user demographics during this two-year period. Table 4 displays data from 1992 to 1994 in five demographic categories. I n general the demographic changes reveal a shift away from the typical transit-dependent profile. The percentage of riders with a househo ld income tess than $10,000 decreased from 63 to 57 percent, white the percentage of riders with no vehicle available dropped from 62 to 57 percent. These changes are significant at the 95 percent confidence level. Other shifts support th is trend, although they are not statistically significant at the 95 percen t level. For example, the percentages of males and of whi te s have increased since 1992, while the percentage of riders 60 years of age or older has declined. CHAPTER 2: ECAT RIDERSHIP SURVEY
Figure 1 DEMOGRAPIDCS 17 years or under 18 to 24 years 25 to 34 years 35 to 44 years 45 to 54 years 55 to 60 years Age SYSTEM TOTAL Annual Household Income 15,000 to Sl9,999 20,000 to $24,999 25,000 tO $29,999 $30,000 and over PART 1: SHORT-TERM STRATEGIES Fem.Je 61% Gender Hispanic Other AfricanAmerican 66% One 29% 1.4% 1. 4% Ethnic Origin White 32% Two 10% Three or more 3% Auto Ownership
PENSACOLA URBA1VIZED AREA TRANSIT IMPROVEMENT STRATEGY Table 3 D e mographic Co mparisons witb Escambia County Category ECAT Escambla County Gender Male 39% 49% F emale 61% 51% Ethnic Origin White 32% 76% African-American 66% 20% Hispanic 1 % 2% Other 1% 2% Household Income Less than $10,000 57% 18% $10,000 to $14 999 23% 11% $15,000 to $19 ,99 9 11% 10% $20,000 to $29, 999 7% 20% $30,000 and over 3% 41% Age 17 years or under 6% 25% 18 to 24 years 22% 12% 25 to 44 years 50% 31% 45 to 54 years 10% 11% 55 to 59 years 4% 5% 60 yea.rs or more 9% 16% Vehicle Ownership None 57% 9% One 29% 37% Two 10% 40% Three or more 3% 14% CHAPTER 2: ECAT RIDERSHIP SURVEY
Figure 2 DEMOGRAPHICS 17 years or under 18 to 24 years 25 to 44 years 45 10 54 years 55 to 59 years 60 years or more Age County 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% ECAT & Escambia County Comparison Annual Household Income $15,000 to $19,999 $20,000 to $2 9 ,9 9 9 $30 000 and over m ECAT County PART 1: SHORT-TERM STRATEGIES Female Frmalc 11% 61% Gender Whit<: 76<)(, Ethnic Origin Two Three or 10% )<)(, None 57% Auto Ownership Other 2% AfmAmlcn 2091. Hisp t nic 2% Thre e or more 14% None 9%
PENSACOl-A URBANIZED AREA TRANSIT [MPROJ!EMENT STRATEGY Table 4 Demograpbic Comparisons of ECAT Surveys CategOtY Current Survey Previous Survey (1994) (1992) Gender Male 39% 36% Female 61% 64% Ethnic Origin White 32% 29% African-American 66% 67% Hispanic 1% 2% Other 1% 2% Household Income less than $10,000 57% 63% $10 000 to $14,999 23% 20% $15,000 to $19,999 11% 8% $20 ,000 to $29,999 7% 5% $30 000 and over 3% 4% Age 17 years or unde r 6% 4% 18 to 24 years 22% 23% 25 to 44 years 50% 47% 45 to 54 years 10% 10% 55 to 59 years 4% 5% 60 years or more 9% 12% Vehicle Ownership No vehicles available 57% 62% One vehicle available 29% 23% Two vehicles available 10% 10% Three or more vehicles available 3% 5% CHAPTER 2: ECAT RIDERS/liP SURVEY
CHAPTER 2: ECAT RIDERSHIP SURVEY PART/: SHORT-TERM STRATEGIES This is a blank page
PENSACOLA URBANIZED AREA TRANSIT IMPROVEMENT STRATEGY SYSTEM PROFILE -Travel Behavior A number of questions related to travel behavior characteristics of ECA T riders were included in the survey. Questions in this category include: mode of access fare payment method trip origin frequency of ridership mode of egress reasons for using transit trip destination travel alternatives fare category length of transit usage Thes e questions help identify passenger trip origin/destination and modes of access/egress. Figure 3 summarizes trip purposes and modes of access. Figures 4 through 9 present responses to individual travel behavior questions, and compare these to the responses from the 1992 survey 1994 responses are also shown graphically. The comparisons are discussed more fully at the end of t his section. Trip Origin/Destination Most survey respondents reported their trips as home or work based, i .e. having home or work as their origin or destination. Nearly all respondents indicated that their trip either began (60 percent) or ended (37 percent) at home Seventeen percent of respondents noted that their trips began at work while 28 percent reported work as their destination. The sur v ey included a question on whether the boarding and alighting bus stops were within the Pensacola city limits. A quick check of completed surveys indicated tha t these accuracy of responses to these questions was poor, and so these results are not presented in this report. Mode of Access/Egress The access/egress modes have been grouped into major categories: walked, drove dropped off/picked up and transferred This data is summarized in Figure 3. The most common means (combined average of 58 percent) of access/egress is a short walk (less than 3 blocks). Transferring accounts for an additional 19 percent. It is possible that the number of transfers is understated, since many riders were hesitant to complete a second survey after transferr ing. CHAPTER 2: ECAT RIDERSHIP SURVEY
Figure 3 TRAVEL BEHAVIOR Trip Origin Wadr 17'4 Trip Destination Wadr laY. w .. dtoppod olf Modes of AccfJss/ Egras PART/: SHORT-TEilM STRATEGIES
PENSACOLA URBANIZED AREA TRANSIT IMPROVEMENT STRATEGY Fare Category Systemwide, the predominant fare type is the regular adult fare (77 percent), as shown in Figure 4. It should be noted that a significant percent of responses (23 percent) fall into fare categories generally considered transit dependent (i.e. youth, sen iors, disabled). Fare Payment Method A majority of the respondents (64 percent) use cash as the method of tare payment. A total of 13 percent of the respondents use monthly passes to pay their fare, and only four percent use weekly passes. Note that the percentage of respondents using a transfer as a method of fare payment is lower than the percentage of respondents who report transferring from another bus as their mode of access. Presumably, many of the other transferring passengers pay their fares with a monthly or a weekly pass, while some respondents may have reported their init ia l method of fare p ayment Figure 5 contains the breakdown of riders hip by fare payment method. Frequency of Ridership Figure 6 indicates that a significant portion (63 percent) of the ECA T riders are regular users (over four days per week). This indicates a user group which is stable in size and relies frequently on public transportation The percentage of regular users may be somewhat overstated, since frequent riders were more li kely to be included in the sample. CHAPTER 2: ECAT RIDERSHIP SURVBY
CHAPTER 2: ECAT RIDERS81P SURVEY Fare Category Youth Regular Adult Senior D i sabled Regular Adult Senior PART[: SHORT-TERM STRATEGIES Figure 4 Fare Category Current Survey 6.0% 77.2% 9 .7 % 6.7% Previous Survey (1992) 6.0% 75.0% 13.0% 6.0%
PENSACOLA URBANIZED AR.1 TRANSIT IMPROVEMENT STRATEGY FigureS Fare Payment Method _. ' Fare Current Survey Previous Survey (1992) cash 63.7% 59.0% Monthly Pass 13.1% 21. 0% Weekly pass 4 2% 4 0% 20 trip Commuter Tocket 12 .0% 1 0 .0% Transfer 4.2% 2 0% Other 2.8% 3.0% 20Trip Commuter Ticket Other 20% CHAPTER 2: ECAT RIDERSHIP SURVEY
CHAPTER 2: ECAT RIDEitSHIP SURVEY Figure 6 Frequency and Ridership Frequency and Ridership Current Survey . (1994 ) 4 or more days per week 62.6% 2 o r 3 days per week 22.0% About 1 day per week 8.5% less than one day per week 6 .8% 4 OC' mote days per week 2 or 3 days per week About 1 day per week Less than onoe a wMk PART 1: SHORT-TERM STRATEGIES Prevloue Survey (1992) .. 69 0% 19.0% 7.0% 6.0%
PENSACOLA URBANIZED AREA TRANSIT IMPROVEMENT S T RATEGY Reasons for Using Transit Almost 80 percent of the E CA T riders either do not drive, or do not have a car available to them, as shown in Figure 7. This is consistent with prior observations about the l arge proport ion of ECAT riders who are dependent on transit to meet their mobility needs. Travel Alternatives Responses to this question by ECA T riders further illustrates their transit dependency. Over half (56 percent) of respondents indicated that they would either ride with someone else or that they would not make the trip. This is consistent with th e res u lts of the prev i ous question on the most important reason for using transit. Figur e 8 contains responses to this question. Fifteen percent of the sample group indicated that they would not make the trip if the bus were not available. For this group of riders, ECA T prov i des the only means of mobility. Length of Transit Usage Figure 9 reveals that the majority of passengers (56 percent) have been ri ding the bus for over two years, while an add i tional I 0 percent of all passengers hav e been rid in g one to tw o years. In all, this is a stable market for ECA T service. Note, however, that 34 percent of all respondents are r elatively new riders and have been riding for less than one year Travel &havior Comparison of ECA T Surveys Figures 4 through 9 compare travel behavior from the current survey with that of the previous survey There were very few differences between the current ECAT survey and the previou s surv ey. Interestingly, there was a shift toward cash and away from the monthly pass as the method of payment. This may indicat e an increase in occasional ridership. Furthermore there was a six percentage point decrease in patrons who rode the bus four or more days per week and a three percentage point increase i n patrons who rode two or three day s per week. A trend toward attracting new riders to transit is evident in the 3.5 perce n tag e point i ncrease in patrons who had been using ECA T for less than six months and a corresponding decrease in patrons riding ECA T more than one year CHAPTER 2: ECAT RIDERSHIP SURVEY
CHAPTER 2: ECAT RIDERSHIP SURVEY Figure 7 Reasons for Using Transit Reuons for Current Survey : Previous Survey Using Transit (1994) (1992) I don t drive 36.1% 39.0% Car is nol available 43.0% 42 .0% Bus is more economical 7.9% 8 .0% Traffic is too bad 0.9% 0 .0% Parl
PENSACOLA URBANIZED AREA TRANSIT IMPROVEMENT STRATEGY Figure 8 Travel Alternatives for ECAT Riders ' Travfii ;Aitematlva : .. C u rrent Survey Previous survey for ECAT Riders ,. (1994) .. ( 1992) '. Drive 11.8% 9.0% R ide wit h someone 4 1 .2% 42.0% Bicyc le 2.9% 4 .0% Wslk 17.3% 1 6 .0% Taxi 11.6% 14.0% Wouldn't make trip 15.2% 15.0% Ride with someone Wootdn 't make the trip CHAPTER 2 : ECAT R IDERSH I P SURVEY
' CHAPTER 2: ECAT RIDERSHIP SURVEY Figure 9 Length of Transit Usage Current Survey (1994) Previous Survey (1992 ) Less than 6 months 19.5% 16 .0 % 6 months to 1 year 14.0% 14.0% 1 to 2 years 10.2% 12.0% 2 years or longer 56.3% 58.0 % 6 months to 1 year 2 years or longes PART/: SIIORT-TERM STRATEGIES
PENSACOLA UR.BANIZED AREA TRANSIT IMPROVEMENT STRATEGY SYSTEM PROFILE -User Satisfaction Respondents were asked to indicate how satisfied they were with various aspects of the ECAT system. Based on these observations, decisions can be made to direct efforts for future improvements in the system based on patron perception. The results indicate positive levels of satisfaction with each of the particular aspects. The following service aspects have been rated by survey respondents: (a) Days of service (b) Hours of Service (c) Frequency of Servic e (d) Convenience of Routes (e) Dependability of buses (0 Travel time on bus (g) Cost of riding the bus (h) Availability of bus route information (i) Vehicle cleanliness and comfort 0) Operator courtesy (k) Safety on bus and at bus stops (1) Overall ECA T Service Figures I 0 through 21 indicate user satisfaction responses for each of th e above system characteristics. Elements with the most positive ratings include safety (90. 7 percent good or very good), operator courtesy (90.2 percent) and vehicle cleanliness and comfort (87.0 percent). Respondents register the greatest dissatisfaction with hours of service (13.7 percent poor or very poor), frequency of service ( 12.9 percent) and convenience of routes (8.4 percent). These service characteristics also had high percentages of "fair" ratings. It should be noted that ratings for these service characteristics have improved since the previous survey, as seen in the figures. 1994 ratings for each characteristic are presented in graphic format. CHAPTER 2: ECAT RIDERSHIP SURVEY
CHAPTER 2: ECAT RIDERSifiP SURVEY User Satisfaction Comparison of ECAT Surveys All aspects of service in the current surve y bad significant increases in the "goo d" and the "very good" categories when compared with the previous survey A 12 percentage point increase in both dependability of buses and in vehicle cleanliness and comfort is of particular interest. This may be related to the introduction of new buses into service since the la st survey was conducted The percentage of respondents who rated overall ECA T service as "very good" increased from 73 percent in the previous survey to 82 6 percent in the 1994 survey I n all aspects of service, there are significant decreases in the percent of respondents who rated services as "poor or "very poor." Most notably, there is over a six percentage point decrease in riders who rated the cost of riding the bus as "poor" or "very poor Appendix B includes a series of graphs presenting demographic, travel behavior and user satisfaction responses by individual ECA T route. The overall level of satisfaction is fairly consistent across routes from a low of 69 percent rating overall service as good or very good on Route 3 to a high of 92 percent on R oute 4. The new Route 18 (the Blue Angel Express) has a very different r iders hip base, with only 40 percent female riders (compared to 61 percent systemwide), and with 3
PENSACOLA URBANIZED AREA TRANSIT IMPROVEMEN T STRATEGY Figure 10 User Satisfaction: Days of Service ., ;,; .. RaUng. Current Survey Previous Survey (199W .. (1992) Very Good 49. 2% 40.0% Good 34.1% 39.0% Fair 13.4% 1 6.0% Poor 2.1% 3 .0 % Very Poor 1.2% 2.0% Very Poor CHAPTER 2: ECAT RIDERSHIP SURVEY
CHAPTER 2: ECAT RIDERSHIP SURVEY Figure 11 User Satisfaction: Hours of Service Rating Current Survey Previous Survey (1994)' (1992) Very Good 33.0% 23.0% Good 30.0% 35 .0% Fair 23.4% 25.0% Poor 9.2% 12.0% Very Poor 4 5% 5.0% Very Good Good Fair Poor Very Poor PART/: SHORT-TERM STRATEGIES
PENSACOLA URBANIZED AREA TRANSIT IMPROVEMENT STRATEGY Figure 12 User Satisfaction: Frequency of Service < "-'- ' < . Rating Cimant Previous Survey . (1994) (1992) Very Good 29.9% 23.0% Good 34.0% 35.0% Fair 23.2% 27.0% Poor 9.0% 11.0% Very Poor 3.9% 4.0% Very Poor CHAPTER 2: ECAT RIDERSHIP SURVEY
CHAPTER 2: ECAT RIDERSHIP SURVEY Figure 13 User Satisfaction: Convenience of Routes Rating Current s urvey Previous Survey (199'1) (1992) Very Good 35.2% 27.0% Good 34.8% 34.0% Fair 21.6% 26.0% Poor 6.5% 10.0% Very Poor 1.9% 4.0% Poor Very Poor 40% PART 1: SHORT-TERM STRATEGIES
PENSACOLA URBANIZED AREA TRANSIT IMPROVEMENT STRATEGY Figure 14 User Satisfadion: Dependability of Buses Rating Cumnt Survey p..,foua survey (1994) .. (1992) Very Good 47.0% 31 .0% Good 36.3% 40.0% Fair 14.7% 23.0% Poor 1.4% 5 .0% Very Poor 0.6% 2 .0% CHAPTER 2: ECAT RIDERSHIP SURVEY
CHAPTER 2: ECAT RIDERSHIP SURVEY Figure 15 User Satisfaction: Travel Time on Bus Rating Current Survey Previous Survey (1994) (1992) Very Good 34 5% 26.0% Good 37.9% 39.0% Fair 22.6% 26.0% Poor 3.9% 7.0% Very Poor 1.1% 3.0% PART/: SHORT-TERM STRATEGIES
PENSACOLA URBANIZED AREA TRANSIT IMPROVEMENT STRATEGY Figure 16 User Satisfaction: Cost of Riding tbe Bus .. Rating Cun:ent Survey Previous Survey (1994}'. (1992) Very Good 34 .5% 27.0% Good 34.4% 32.0% Fair 27.1% 32.0% Poor 2.4% 7 0% Very Poor 1 5% 3 .0% Very Good CHAPTER 2: ECAT RIDERSHIP SURVEY
CHAPTER 2: ECAT RIDERSHIP SURVEY Figure 17 User Satisfaction: Availability of Bus Route Information Rating Curran t Survey Previous su...,ey (1994) ' (1992) Very Good 47.0% 35.0% Good 36.2% 41.0% Fair 14.7% 18.0% Poor 1 .5% 4 .0% Very Poor 0.6% 1 .0% PART I: SHORT-TER/If STRATEGIES
PENSACOLA URBANIZED ARE4 TRANSIT IMPROVEMENT STRATEGY Figure 18 User Satisfaction: Vehicle Cleanliness and Comfort Rating Current> Si.lrv*Y : PrevioUs' Survey (1994) '. (1992) ; . Very Good 48.7% 34.0% Good 38 3% 42.0% Fair 11.4% 20.0% Poor 1.4% 2 .0% Very Poor 0.2% 2.0% CHAPTER 2: ECAT RiDERSHIP SURVEY
CHAPTER 2: ECAT RIDERSHIP SURVEY Figure 19 User S atisf acti on : Operator Courte sy Rating Current Survey Previous Survey ( 1994)'(1992) Very Good 60.7% 52.0% Good 29.5% 35.0% Fair 8.7% 11.0% Poor 0.7% 2.0% Very Poor 0.4% 1 0% Very Poor PART/: S/IORT-TERM STRATEGIES
PENSACOLA URBANIZED AREA TRANSIT IMPROV E MENT STRATEGY Figure 20 User Satisfaction: Safety on Bus aod a t Bu s Stops N N N .. cumnt Survey Previous su'ivey Rating (1992) .. Very Good 53.9% 46.0% Good 36.8% 39.0% Fair 8.4% 13.0% Poor 0 .8% 2.0% Very Poor 0.2% 1.0% CHAPTER 2: ECAT RIDERSH IP SURVEY
CHAPTER 2: ECAT RIDERSHIP SURVEY Figure 21 User Satisfaction: Overall ECAT Service Rating Current Survey Previous .S urvey (1994) (1992) Very Good 42.3% 32.0% Good 40.3% 41.0% Fair 16.0% 21.0% Poor 1.0% 4.0% Very Poor 0.4% 1.0% PART I: SHORT-TERM STRATEGIES
PENSACOLA URBANIZED AREA TRANSIT IMPROVEMENT STRATEGY CONCLUSIONS ECA T ridership continues to be made up primarily of the transit-dependent, those who have no other alternative means of travel. Ridership is heavily weighted toward low-ineome persons without access to a private vehicle. ECA T has had some success in attracting new riders. The Blue Angel Express in particular has attracted some hi gher-income riders who have other travel options available Rider satisfaction has increased over the past two years for every element of service included in the questionnaire. The percentage of respondents who rate overall service as good or very good has increased to 82.6 percent. Service elements with the most positive ratings include safety (90. 7 percent good or very good), operator courtesy (90.2 percent) and vehicle cleanliness and comfort (87 0 percent). Res pondents register the greatest dissatisfactio n with hours of service (13 7 percent poor or very poor) frequency of service (12.9 percent) and eonvenience of routes (8.4 percent). These service characteristics also had high percentages of "fair" ratings. Eve n these characteristics with relatively low ratings have improved since the 1992 s urve y ECAT OPERATOR SURVEY As with any transit system, the bus operators prove to be an invaluable source of information concerning the quality of service offered to the public. Surveys were distributed to the bus operators by ECA T management. A copy of the survey and the full results are contained in Appendix C. A tota l of 14 surveys were completed by the operators. The most frequent complaint received by the bus operators from the passengers was the need for evening service. The riders also complained about the l ack of Sunday service, infrequent service bus not going where they want, and the lack of bus shelters/benches Eating or drinking on the bus, route/de stination not clear, and trouble getting information also appeared, but to a l e s ser extent. The operators generally agree that t he passengers complaints are valid. II CHAPTER Z: ECAT RIDERSIIIP SURVEY
CHAPTER 2 : ECAT RIDERSHIP SURVEY The operators were asked what improvements they think need to be made to the transit system. Many of the operators fel t that the system should provide free transfers, put up shelters at bus stops, and operate on Sundays. Some wanted more time in their schedules, better route and schedule information, and new, smaller vehicles. Seven of the 14 operators stated that there were no safety prob l ems. No specific safety problem was mentioned by more than one operator. When asked on wh ich routes the operators have trouble keeping on schedule, Routes 16 and II were both mentioned by at least four operators. Routes 15, 7A, and I were m entioned by two operators. No more than one operator mentioned any other schedule problems Routes 16, II and 7B were chosen by rwo operators as needing modification in order to stay on sc he dule Two operators felt that Route 12 should run every hour. No other modification was mentioned by more than one operator By a large majority (13 to 1), operators stated that night service was necessary The drivers also thought that Sunday service was necessary (8 to 5). One operator did not respond to the Sunday question PART I : SHORT-TERM STRATEGIES
This is a blank page
CHAPTER 3: INTERVIEWS WITH KEY LOCAL 0FFICTALS Chapter 3 INTERVIEWS WITH KEY LOCAL OFFICIALS One element of the Transit Improvement Strategies study is to interview decision-makers in the public and private sectors in Escambia County The purpose of these interviews is to obtain information regarding the perceptions of the transit system, including its strong points and weak points, and the level of community support for transit. Similar interviews were conducted in 1992 as part of the Transit Development Plan. While this round of interviews was not intended to be a direct follow-up with the same interviewees as in 1992, questions related to changes i n perceptions over the last two years have been included. CU T R conducted a total of seven interviews with Pensacola and Escambia County officials and in d i viduals in the private sector. The MPO staff assisted in identifying appropriate persons to be interviewed. An outline of the questions included in the interview may be found in Appendix D of this report. Results of the interviews are summarized in the following areas: perceptions of th e transit system; policy issues affecting transit; improvements to Escambia County Area Transit. PERCEPTIONS Local officials report that there is no awareness of transit, either in a positive or negative sense, on the part of most county residents. When thought of at all, transit is considered as a necessary service to provide for a segment of the population that needs it. One official commented on the "traditional Old South" view of transit ridership as composed of minority service workers. There is also the perception that most vehicles are empty. According to one interviewee, people tend to see the buses in residential neighborhoods or downtown near the end of their routes and understandably form this impression. This person has personally observed the bus y conditions around the transfer center, but realizes that most residents never see this level of activity. PART 1: SHORT-TERM STRATEGTES
PENSACOLA URBANIZED AREA TRANSI T IMPROVEMENT STRATEGY Perceptions and levels of awareness obviously differ by neighborhood. In the poorer, more transit-dependent areas of the county, residents are knowledgeable about routes and schedules As reported in the on-board survey, riders have a very positive perception of the system. In middle-class and upper-class neighborhoods, however, transit is perceived as a means of travel for those without other choices. Among issues raised in the interviews were the idea that the buses do not go where people want and the possibility that forcing people to transfer discourages trans it usage. These notions suggest that routing changes might increase ridership. The concept of replacing the current route network based on a central transfer location with a grid system was raised, but ridership levels and the overall density of development are not high enough in Escambia Counry to justify such a change. Officials characterized the availability of information as reasonably good for existing riders, but not so good for new markets. There was widespread agreement that ECA T needs to continue its marketing efforts to publicize the transit system and educate potential new rider s. The attempt on the part of the County Commission to make significant cuts in the county's financial support for transit raised the level of awareness. On the positive side, the number of persons who turned out to support the transit system surprised the Commissioners, according to one county official. On the negati ve side, another official reported an increased level of awareness of the dollars going to transit that might better be used on roadway improvements. Interviewees generally rated the bus fare as reasonable, although a minority felt that a fare increase might be warranted. One respondent suggested a t iered fare system, with the lowest fares for the elderly (a $100 annual pass was mentioned), a reasonable fare similar to the current fare for those commuting to work, and the highest price for the occasional r ider "cruising the mall." ECA T' s existing fare structure offers weekly and monthly passes at a significant discount to regular riders, as well as discounted fares for senior citizens, persons with disabilities and students. Urbanized areas with serious traffic congestion and limited or expensive parking in business districts often have high transit ridership. Congestion and parking problems are effective deterrents to the use of an automobile, especially for the trip to and from work, and provide an CHAPTER 3: INTERVIEWS WITH KEY LOCAL O FFICIALS
CHAPTER J: INTERVIEWS WITH KEY LOCAL OFFICIALS inc entive for the commuter to consider transit Interviewees report that there are no major problems with traffic congestion in Escambia County. Spot congestion was reported at certain locations, with Davis Highway being mentioned most frequently. Parking is readily available and reasonably priced. Overall traffic conditions are favorable for the automobile driver, and so the typical commuter in Escambia County has no incentive to switch from automobile to transit ECAT received high marks for its responsiveness to community needs. Throughout the interviews, repeated references were made to the absern:e of complaints about transit service and the willingness of ECAT's management to address issues brought to its attention by community officials Interviewees recognize that scarce resources limit ECAT's ability to respond to ridership needs in many cases, but continue to praise the transit agency for its willingness to listen and to act upon suggestions when it has the ability to do so. Interviewees agree that the primary role of the transit system is to provide mobility for people with no other travel options. Transit was characterized as the lifeblood of those who ride, enabling them to get to jobs, stores and services. A secondary role of the transit system is to promote jobs. One respondent mentioned that the existence of a transit network serving most of the urbanized area is an important selling point in the effort to attract businesses to Escambia County. There were mixed opinions with regard to whether perceptions of the Escambia County Area Transit have changed over the past two years Some cited the relocation of the transfer center from downtown to its new location on Fairfield Drive as a positive step, but others reported that the new location is not safe due to proximity to the county jail, or is too removed from major activity centers The public's reception of the new buses has been positive. Overall, however, the system continues to be viewed as a necessary part of the infrastructure, but a part that bas little or no impact on the lives of most county residents. POLICIES The interviews did not reveal a desire to change policies external to the transit system to encourage greater usage. Land use and zoning issues were not raised as a tool to shape growth in the county and encourage medium-or high -density nodes that might be well served by transit. PART/: SHORT-TERM STRATEGIES
PENSACOLA URBANIZED AREA TRANSIT L"fPROJIEMENT STRATEGY The consensus on residential and commercial growth in the county is that it is taking place toward the north, where there is little transit serv i ce. The transit system can do little to respond to these trends according to most interviewees, other than perhaps to provide service to emerging commercial and retail centers. There is definitely no willingness to change parking policies by either raising the price of parking or limiting the number of spaces. Suggestions for internal policy changes include offering economic incentives to employees to increase transit usage and offering discounts to businesses for group purchases of monthly passes. A provision in the federa l Comprehensive National Energy Strategy law enables employers to provide emp l oyees with a transportation fringe benefit of up to $60 per month. The benefit is for use by employees making the trip to work on public transportation or by vanpools. Any amount up to $60 per month is tax free for the employee, and the benefit is a tax-deductible, ordinary business expense for the employer. Since the current price of an ECA T monthly pass is $30, there is an opportunity to explore this market with employers in the county. Chapter 8 contains a specific recommendation to establish a commuter pass program. The interv iews asked about the value of serv ice guidelines for making decisions about specific transit routes and proposals. Some transit systems have Board-adopted guidelines regarding when service changes are warranted, while many systems use informal guidelines in th e internal monitoring of system performance. Most respondents were neutral on the subject, although a preference for objective methods to assist in these decisions was expressed Chapter 6 sugg e sts service performance standards for ECAT. One interviewee commented that the Board of County Commissioners will examine cost implications of any proposal before deciding whether it merits implementation, regardless of any guidelines that may be proposed IMPROVEMENTS The interviewees agreed that any changes to the system should be targeted to meet community needs T here was not a consensus regarding what these community needs are beyond a need to operate more efficiently. Lower costs and the use of smaller buses were the most common answers to the question of needs. Ensuring that service complies with the provisions of the Amer icans w i th Disabilities Act (ADA) was one recommendation and another official suggested that ECAT serve school trips and provide reduced-price tokens for students. U nfortunately, the CHAPTER 3: INTERVIEWS WITH KEY LOCAL OFFICIALS
CHAPTER 3: INTERVIEWS WITH KEY LOCAL OFFICIALS current transit network does not serve major school locations directly, so at present the market for school service is limited. All transit agencies face a choice between improvements to current service and expansion of service to new markets. While this is not strictly a choice between two mutually exclusive options, most agencies will emphasize one area over the other. This question was posed as part of the interviews, and there was considerable interest in serving new markets. While some respondents cited the importance of improving the confidence in existing service before expanding, most interviewees expressed support for serving new markets. One interesting comment was that most current riders use the buses for clearly-detlned purposes and would not make additional trips if existing service were improved so that the only area for growth is in markets not currently served. Geographic areas mentioned included north of the existing service area the University of West Florida area (UWF has three trips per day), Pensacola Beach, and Santa Rosa County. The regional concept of incorporating Santa Rosa County into ECA T' s service area is interesting, although perhaps more long-term in scope; the official who suggested this also commented that Santa Rosa residents would not be typical transit riders. Some respondents defined markets in terms other than geography: youth and tourists were both mentioned as potential new riders. When asked if any areas deserved a higher priority for service interviewees mentioned downtown Pensacola in addition to other areas mentioned above. The idea of a downtown trolley appears to be gaining acceptance although ECA T would need a funding commitment from downtown merchants before agreeing to operate a trolley. One interviewee brought out the need for east west service in the county. Citing the issue of service guidelines, one respondent said that the worst reason to institute service in a particular area is because someone wants it; the decision shou ld be made objectively. Obviously, no service changes will be made purely as the result of the interviews. The purpose of this question was to make a preliminary identification of loca tions where there is a perception of need for additional service. There were mixed responses to the idea of park-and-ride lots coupled with express bus service. Most interviewees did not report a need for such service, but the idea that express routes could attract a new middle-class market was recognized. As noted in the on-board survey, the Blue Angel Express limited-stop route's ridership profile includes a much greater share of middle-class PART[: SHORT-TERM STRATEGIES
PENSACOLA URBANIZED AREA TRANSIT IMPROVEMENT STRATEGY riders than any other route in the system. Riders with other travel options (sometimes called "choice" riders) can generally be attracted to transit only by a high-quality service such as a limited-stop or express bus route. The issue of appropriate goals for the transit agency was raised in the interviews, but did not generate much discussion. The status quo was acceptable to most interviewees as long as there were no complaints or demands to improve service. Among suggested goals were: increase ridership; provide greater coverage over a broader service area; operate more efficiently ; continue to have an active presence in the community. One interviewee suggested that ECAT should model itself after other successful systems, such as Lynx in Orlando. Specific improvements commonly cited include marketing transit service and switching to smaller buses. Interviewees envisioned additional marketing to "choice," middle-class residents to broaden ECA T' s ridership base. The new training center slated to open at the Naval Air Station (NAS) was mentioned by several respondents as the type of development that could generate additional ridership. Other marketing ideas included working with small groups to provide information on ECA T services, improving signage, talking to schools, and advertising more frequently. The most interesting marketing technique raised in the interviews was to get the politicians on the bus out at the transfer center so that they can see for themselves the quality of service and the number of residents using the system. Greater efficiency, redesign of routes, a greater transit presence downtown (shelters or a mini-terminal), service to the beach and installation of bicycle racks on the buses were also mentioned Areas of concern to the interviewees include the transit service area, the transfer center, and the wage rates for bus operators. Officials are not sure that the transit system is serving the right areas. The transit network design, with loop routes meeting at a central transfer location, requires a transfer to complete many trips, and the transfer center is located away from major activity areas. The issue of operators' pay arose at a Commission meeting shortly before the interviews were conducted, in the context of drivers making more money than sheriff's deputies, and was fresh in the minds of several interviewees. Other needed improvements are a plan for rational growth of the system (which is seen as having evolved to its current status without guidance), education of the public regarding transit, a broadening of the ridership base beyond the transit dependent, and a strong marketing program. CHAPTER 3: INTERVIEWS WITH KEY LOCAL OFFICIALS
CHAPTER 3: INTERVIEWS WITH KEY LOCAL O FFICIALS While there were p l enty of suggestions for improvements there were very few ideas on how to provide addit i onal funding to enable ECAT to explore these poss ib ilities. At the p re sent time, there is no willingness to provide addit i onal funding M ost officials are expecting ECA T to i dentify cost savings through more efficient operation. There is o n ly slightly more willingness to consider a dedicated fund for transit such as a penny from the lo cal option gas tax receipts, but this idea is opposed because it takes away the flexibility to fund other needed services SUMMARY At the conclusion of the interviews, CUTR asked the key local officials to identi f y the single most important thing to change about the transit system, and to c i te t h e system s strengths and accomplishments. The responses to these questions provide an excellent summary of perceptions of Escamb ia County Area Transit. While interviewees offered a variety of responses to the question regarding the one action to take first to impr ove the transit system a clear pattern did emerge from the series of interviews. The areas needing greatest atten ti on are marketing and service improv ement s in specific areas. Respondents see a need for more marketing ac t ivities to increase awareness of ECA T within the community. Specifically, discretionary riders (or "middle class America") are seen as the focus for marketing campaigns ECAT shou l d make these potential riders aware of the convenience ease of use safety, reliability and low cost of using the bus. One reply to this question was, "Make me comfortable about putt in g my wife on the bus." Marketing for t he Blue Angel Express has succeeded in attracti ng discretionary riders. Innovative service concepts such as the limited stop service offered by the Blue Angel Express p r ovide an excellent opportunity for marketing activities of this nature Beyond mar k eting campaigns, availability of basic information on using t he transit system was also emphasized, through such means as better signage or advertisements in the Yellow Pages. The most frequently mentioned g eo graphic areas cited as needing attention are the beach and downtown. Serv ice to Pe nsacola Beach is clearly of interest to local officials as a way to serve the tourist market. Trolleys were mentioned as a possibility for downtown Pensacola One in t erviewee noted that a stronger transit presence needed to be established in the downtown area. PART/: SHORT-TERM STRATEGIES
PENSACOLA URBANIZED AREA TRANSIT L'IIPROVEMENT STRATEGY Several routes travel to downtown, but there is no one meeting spot for these buses since the transfer center was moved from downtown to Fairfield Drive. An on-street combination of bus stops and shelters might impart more of a transit presence to downtown. Other suggestions for immediate improvements include smaller buses, service to the northern part of the county, and bicycle racks on buses or at major bus stops. Interviewees consistently rate management as the major strength of the transit system. The overall viability of the system, the appearance and cleanliness of the bus fleet, increased dependability of the buses, the caliber of bus operators, the new buses and the new logo are all positive accomplishments, according to the interviewees. While the transfer center was cited as an area of concern, it also received positive comments regarding its new location, viewed as more centralized for future county growth. Local officials clearly have a great deal of confidence in ECAT's management team, especially in its willingness to be responsive and its ability to look to the future. The following summary regarding perceptions of and attitudes toward ECAT may be drawn as a result of the interviews with key local officials. Transit is a necessary service. Officials recognize that it is not a profitable operation, but that it has a role in the overall transportation network. Transit's role is limited. ECA T provides service to county residents who have no other means of mobility. The constituency supporting transit is also limited Most interviewees would like to see the constituency broadened to include more middle-class commuters, but there is little willingness to provide additional local funding for the transit system. There is support for increased marketing activities. The transit system is well-managed. There is a high degree of confidence in ECA T's management. Perceived shortfalls of the transit system are seen as a result of the environment in which transit operates (low density, little congestion, plentiful parking). CHAPTER 3: INTERVIEWS WITH KEY LOCAL OFFICIALS
CHAPTER 3: INTERYIEWS WITH KEY LOCAL OFFICIALS Efficiency is a top priority. Officials need to know that the system is using local tax dollars in an efficient maruter. Awareness of and experience with transit is low. There are still misperceptions, such as that no one ever rides the buses and that ridership is composed exclusively of minorities. Local officials might benefit from a visit to the transfer center to observe operations. Making improvements to the system will be difficult. Transit is not a high-priority item among elected officials, except when funding pressures arise. Until the transit system has greater passenger support and more certain financial means at its disposal it will be hard pressed to make improvements. PART[: SHORT-TERM S TRATEGIES
This is a blank page
CHAPTER 4: ANALYSIS OF VANS ANO BUSES Chapter 4 ANALYSIS OF LIGHT-DUTY BUSES AND VANS vs. 30-FOOT BUSES IN FIXED-ROUTE REVENUE SERVICE Escambia County Area Transi t is requesting funding for the purchase of five new 30-foot buses for replacement of five 1974 vintage 35-foot buses as part of the overall bus replacement program begun in FY 1992 As an alternative, the County would like to consider the pot ent ial for the use of light -dut y smaller buses or vans in fixed-route service. As part of the TIS work, CUTR has been requested to offer a brief recommendation on the issue of vehicle size. BACKGROUND The Pensacola Transit Division of the ATC Management Corporation operates the Escambia County Area Transit (ECAT) under terms of an agreement between Escambia County and ATC Management Corporation. A TC has operated ECA T since 1972. All personnel are employees of the Pensacola Transit Division of ATC MaJlllgement Corporation with the exception of the Resident Manager and Maintenance Manager, who are directly employed by ATC. All vehicles, equ i pment and materials are the property of Escambia County. ECAT operates from an Adm inistrative an d Maintenance Facility at the comer of Fairfield Drive and L Street. In addition to maintaining its own vehicle fleet ECA T provides a ve hicle maintenance program to other County Departments and to several non-profit agencies app rove d by the County Board of Commiss ion ers The vehicle maintenance program services fire engines, ambulances and vans for use in the Head Start Program. Net profits generated by this contracted maintenance function are used as non-operating revenue in the mass transit budget, thereby reduc ing the County contribution required for local match. ECA T is a fixed-route system consisting of 18 routes. Most routes operate at a frequency of one trip per hour, although three routes operate at a frequency of one trip every half hour. Service PART/: SHORT-TERM STRATEGIES
PENSACOLA URBANIZED AREA TRANSIT L\tPROVEMENT STRATEGY is provided on 14 routes on Saturdays. No service is provided on Sundays and major holidays. Span of service is from 5:00 am to 6:40 pm on weekdays and from 6:00 am to 6:40 pm on Saturdays. All service is local fixed-route, with the exception of the Blue Angel Express route connecting the Pensacola Airport with the U.S Nava l Air Station. ECA T operates what is known as a pulse or timed transfer system. All routes serve the transfer center adjacent to the ECAT facility and are scheduled to leave from the transfer center on the hour or half hour. This type of system facilitates easy transfers between routes. The current ECA T bus fleet consists of 17 GMC buses purchased in 1974, and 12 Orion II buses purchased in 1992 The GMC buses are 35 feet in length, carry 45 seated passengers, and are not handicapped accessible The Orion II buses are 30 feet in length carry 29 seated passengers and are handicapped -accessi ble. The GMC buses are currently being considered for replacement. ECA T intends to replace 5 of the buses each year over the next three years. Once the GMC buses are replaced ECAT fixed-route service will be I 00 percent handicapped-accessible. ISSUES The merits of transit vehicle size periodically come up as an issue at most transit agencies. At systems where ridership has been declining or budgets have become increasingly tighter, transit board members and citizens have asked the quest ion of whether buying smaller vehicles would be more cost effective. Their reasoning is simple: smaller vehicles cost less to operate while still being able to serve the needs of the riding public. There are several issues, including cost, to discuss when considering the purchase and operation of light-duty buses or vans in fixed-route service. Definition According to the Federal Transit Administration's (FTA) Glossary of Transit Terms for Section 15 reporting, a class C motorbus is defined as: CHAPTER 4: ANALYSIS OF VANS AND BUSES
CHAPTER 4: ANALYSIS OF VANS AND BUSES Vehicles equipped with rubber tires and pawered by diesel, gasoline, propane or other alternative fuel engine contained wilhin the vehicle. Class C motorbuses are equipped with less /han 2 5 seats. According to the same glossary, a van is defined as: A vehicle which has a typical seating capacity of 5 to 15 passengers and is classified as a van by vehicle manufacturers. Standard vans are available from automobile manufacturers and are part of their standard production line. A modified van is a standard van which has undergone some s/ruc/ural changes, usually made 10 increase ils size and particularly its height The seating capacity of modified vans is approximalely 9 to 18 passengers. It is assumed that the m o torbus being considered for operation of fixed-route service is similar to the 24.5-foot Diamond Coach VIP 2500E bus, described in Table 5: Table 5 Characteristics of 24.5-foot Diamond Coach VIP 2500E Bus Characteristic 24.5-foot Diamond Bus Base Price $40,000 Diesel Engine Add $4,000 Veh i cle Le ngt h 24.5 feet Fuel Capacity 35 gallons (Regular unleaded gasoline or diesel) Dealer estimated 5 m iles pe r gallon (gasol i ne) 10 Fuel Effic ie ncy miles per gallon (diesel) assu m ed at 3.5 (gasoline) and 7. 5 (diesel) for fixed -ro ute passenger service Seating Capacity Base Vehicle 18, includes 3 fli pseat wheelchair po s it io ns Vehicle Cyc l e 4 years or 100,000 miles (as per FTA guidelines) Farebox Add $4.000 Radio Add $800 PART/: SHORT-TERM STRATEGIES
PENSACOLA URBANIZED AREA TRANSIT IMPRO VEMENT STRATEGY It is asswned that the van being considered for operation of fixed-route service is similar in nature to the modified vans currently in use for paratransit service at most transit agencies. Table 6 presents the characteristics of a IS-foot Dodge Ram Maxi-van recently purchased and modified by the Hillsborough Area Regional Transit Authority (HART) in Tampa, for use in the provision of paratransit service. Note that a diesel engine is not available for this vehicle. Table 6 Characteristics of a 15-foot Dodge Ram Maxi-van Characteristic 15-foot Dodge Maxi-van Base State Contract price $15,370 $10,814 Van Conversion Cost inc ludes ra i sed roof (turtle top). hand icapped seating. and wheelchair lift Vehicle Length 15 feet Fuel Capacity (Regular unleaded gasoline) 33 gallons Fuel Efficiency 8 miles per gallon (gasoline), In urban use. Seating Capacity Base Vehicle 15 Seating Capacity after Conversion 14 (no wheelchairs) lose 2 seated spaces for each wheelchair, up to 3 wheelchair locations. Vehicle Life Cycle 4 years or 100,000 miles (as per FTA guidelines) Farebox Add $4,000 Rad i o Add $800 CHAPTER 4: ANALYSIS OF VANS AND BUSES
CHAf>TER 4: ANALYSIS OF VANS AND Table 7 swnmarizes the three vehicles asswning diesel engines for the buses and gasoline for the van. Table 7 Compariso n of Characteristics of 30-, 24.5-, and 15-foot Vehicles Vehicle 3D .foot 24.5-foot 15-foo t Orion II Diamond Coach Dodge Ram Van Total Purchase Price with Radio, $220,000' $48 800' $30 ,800' Fa rebox and Necessary Conversions Vehicle Life Cycle 12 years 4 years 4 years Lifecy cle Cost $18 ,3 33/year $ 12 000/year $7 700 Fuel Capacity 100 gallons 35 gallons 33 gallon s F ue l Efficiency (MPG) 5 7.5 8 Fuel Range (miles) 500 263 264 Seating Capa c ity -max imum 29 18 1 4 with 3 whee l chairs 26 18 1 1 Loca l county match i s 10 percent of total capital cost. Factors to be Considered The following factors shou ld be considered when deci ding on the type and size of vehicles for use in fixed route urban s ervice: Vehicle operating costs Drive r costs Maintenance costs Vehicle cost Vehicle lifec ycle cost Vehicle seating, seating comfort, stand ing, wheelchair capacities Maximum load point by route Scheduling issues Route alignments (arterials, highways, resident ial neighborhoods office parks etc.) PART 1: SHORT-TERM STRATEGIES
PENSACOLA URBANIZED AREA TRANSIT IMPROVEMENT STRATEGY Distance between stops Spare parts inventory, in terchangeab ility of vehicle components Training needs (driver and mechanics) Fuel costs, fuel capacity/range Frequency of repairs ADA concerns Farebox location and ease of use Boarding and alighting time Vehicle turning radius Drivers operating more than one vehicle type Mechanics maintaining more than one vehicle type Passenger comfort Public perception Image of the transit system Safety It is assumed that since ECAT cUITently operates 30and 35-foot buses in their fixed-route service, these vehicles meet the minimum needs of the above listed factors. The following sections provide a comparison of light-duty buses and vans to heavy-duty 30-foot buses for each criterion. Vehicle Operating Costs A major misconception which arises when discussing the operating costs of smaller vehic les, is that there is somehow an immediate and significant reduction in the costs to operate the vehicle. In fact driver/supervisor wages and benefits account for the significant majority of the cost to provide the service As an example, based on FY 1993 Section 15 statistics for ECAT, driver/supervisor wages and benefits account for 86 percent of the total system vehicle operating expenses for fixed-route service. Fuel and lubricants is the next largest cost accounting for 9.4 percent of the total vehicle operations costs. Assuming that the driver wage remai n s the same for van or bus drivers, any significant operating costs savings would have to come from fuel savings related to more efficient vans. Based on a fuel efficiency of 5.0 miles per gallon for the Orion II 30-foot buses, 7.5 for the Diamond Coach and 8.0 for the van and accounting for bulk CHAPTER 4: ANALYSIS OF VANS AND BUSES
. CHAPTER 4: ANALYSIS OF VANS AND BUSES purchase costs of diesel fuel ($0.60/gallon) and unleaded gasoline ($0.88/gallon), ECA T would save approximately $4,420 per year using the Diamond Coach, and $1,100 per year with vans if 10 percent of the current fleet were replaced and operated on typical routes. Similarly, maintenance costs are primarily a function of the number of vehicles, and the associated number of maintenance employees with maintenance materials and supplies accounting for only 27 percent of the ECAT total vehicle maintenance expenses in FY 1993. Vehicle Cost/Lifecycle Costs ECA T is currently budgeting $220 000 for each Orion II 30-foot transit coach This price include s handicapped seating, wheelchair lift, farebox, and radio system. A similarly equipped Diamond Coach would cost approximately $48,800. The 15-foot Dodge Maxi van referenced earlier costs approximately $26,000 Including a farebox ($4,000), and radio system ($800), the total van cost would be $30,800. According to ITA Circular 9030.1A, a medium size heavy-duty 30-foot transit bus would have a lifecycle of at least 10 years or 350 000 miles. Given that the majority of EC AT buses are 20 years old and hav e 573,000 miles per vehicle on average, a conservative assumption would be a 12 year lifecycle. The light-duty Diamond Coach and the van would have a lifecycle of at least 4 years or I 00,000 miles. Based on the expected v e hicle life information the annualized cost of the 30-foot Orion II would be $18 333, whereas the annualized cost of the Diam ond Coach would be $12 000, and the van would be $7,500. Vehicle Passenger Capaeities As stated earlier, vans recently purchased by HART seat 14 passengers and will lose 2 seats for each wheelchair position used. The 30-foot Orion II seats 29 passengers and will also lose 2 seats for each wheelchair pos it ion. The 24.5-foot Diamond Coach would seat 18 passengers and would trade out wheelchair positions one for one. The IS-foot vans would not provide hand rails or proper aisle space for standing patrons The Or i on II can accommodate II standing patrons, while the Diamond Coach would accommodate 6 standees. Based on these numbers, an Orion PART/: S/IORT-TERM STRATEGIES
PENSACOLA URBANIZED AREA TRANSIT IMPROVEMENT STRATEGY II would be capable of accommodating between two and three times the number of patrons at a maximum l oad point in comparison to the van, and two-thirds more than the Diamond Coach. According to the 1993 Transit Passenger Vehicle Fleet Inventory published by the American Public Transit Association (APT A), the percentage of transit vehicles used in fixed-route revenue service in the United States with a seating capacity of 18 or fewer patrons is minuscule (less than one percent). Even smaller transit systems have found that smaller vehicles limit their flexibility. Passenger comfort is yet another issue which must be considered in comparing the use of small buses and vans to 30-foot buses in fixed-route service. Vans offer less headroom than buses. Many seating arrangements in vans cause patrons to face one another or to have three persons per bench seat. There is also no good free aisle-way to walk in when boarding the vehicle and entering your seat, as is the case with a 30-foot bus. The Diamond Coach would be similar in arrangement to the Orion II, though on a smaller scale. Maximum Load Point and Scheduling The maximum load point is the location along a specific route where the vehicle is most crowded Based on the passenger capacities previously discussed, if a transit vehicle anywhere along its route carried more than 14 (witho u t a wheelchair) passengers a van could not be used to operate that trip. Similarly, if a trip carried more than 24 passengers along its route it could not be served by the Diamond Coach. Give n the requirements of the Americans with D isabilities Act (ADA) it is more realistic to consider 12 or even 1 0 passengers on the van as the upper limit at the maximum load point to allow for one or two wheelchairs. Transit scheduling considerations also are important to consider for thi s issue Given the way schedules are designed a bus or other vehicle larger than a van would have to be available if the number of passengers exceeded 12 (assuming one wheelchair passenger) or 10 (assum i ng two wheelchair passengers) at any time during the operator s eight-hour shifi. Similarly if the maximum load point exceeded 24 in comparison to the Diamond Coach. The changeover betw e en vehicles could be done at the transfer center, which is immediately adjacent to tbe bus garage, but the important point to note is that the use of smaller buses or vans would not reduce the number of larger vehicles required in cases like this. CHAPTER 4: ANALYSIS OF VANS AND BUSES
CHAPTER 4: ANALYSTS OF VANS AND BUSES Schedules could conce ivab ly be rewritten to maximize the opportunities to use smaller vehicles by designing opera tor shifts (or "runs") so that some runs have very light ridership. Current scheduling practice at ECAT is intended to maximize the operator's productive revenue time and thus minimize costs. To this end, operator runs frequently include more than one route. For example, a run might alternate trips on a route with a round-trip travel time of 90 minutes and another route with a round-trip time of 30 minutes. This practice, known as inter lining is standard in the transit industry because it minimizes the number of vehicles and operators required. Maximizing the opportunities to use smaller vehicles may result in less efficient overall use of personnel and equipment, to the extent that a busy route could not be interlined with a lightly-used route. The end result could well be an increase in operating cost s Table 8 shows the maximum load point count for each route in the ECAT system based on recently completed ridership counts. As can be seen from this table, based on vehicle passenger capacity only routes I and 18 could be served by the van, and then only if there are no more than one wheelchair passengers onboard. Eleven of the 17 routes shown have maximum load points of greater than 24 passengers, and would therefore not be able to efficiently operate with the 24 passenger Diamond Coach. Route Alignment A van in fixed-rou te service does offer benefits in turning radius, vehicle weight, and perception. A van may be allowed onto private property i n order to serve a private development more directly, whereas a 30-foot bus may be viewed as too obtrusive or unattractive, or may actually exceed weight restrictions of certain roadways or bridges. Vans obviously have a better turning radius than a 30-foot transit coach, although in almost all cases the normal routing of buses in Escambia County is along major streets where the turning radius is not an issue. The operating differences of th e Diamond Coach would be minimal. Distance Between Stops Vans are usua lly used in paratransit service, where s tops occur much less frequently than in fixed route service. Paratransit service may pick up a few individuals and gradually drop them off along an efficient path of boardings and ali ghtings, stopping the vehicle 5-10 time s per hour. PART/: SHORT-TERM STRATEGIES
PENSACOLA URBANIZED AREA TRANSIT IMPROVEMENT STRATEGY Frequenlly paratransit serice closely resembles taxicab service, in which a passenger is picked up and driven to a particular location. The Diamond Coach light-duty bus is generally used as airport shuttles, and for chartered service, requiring very limited stops. On the other hand, fixed route service may demand five stops in a single mile of urban service. The Diamond Coach and vans highlighted in this report are not designed as heavy-duty vehicles capable of handling the daily stop and go of fixed-route service. Route 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 9 10A 10B 11 12 13 14 15 16 18 Table 8 Maximum Load Point nine Location 8:30AM L and Fairfield 7:30AM L and Fairfield 12:10 PM PJC 5:00PM L and Fairfield 4:00PM L and Fairfield 7:30AM L and Fairfield 2:50PM Pollack Center 7:30AM L and Fairfield 3:30PM L and F airfteld 7 :00AM L and Fairfield 4:30PM L and Fairfield 7 :30AM L and Fairfield 7:30AM L and Fairfield 7 :30AM L and Fairfield 7:45AM Baptist 3:00PM L and Fairfield 6:12AM Navy Base Passengers 11 33 24 16 30 20 30 38 34 30 30 15 30 45 45 35 12 CHAPTER 4: ANALYSIS OF VANS AND BUSES
CHAPTER 4: ANALYSIS OF VANS AND BUSES Spare Parts Inventory Having multiple types and sizes of vehi cles creates concerns with spare parts inventory and the pot ential interchangeability of vehicle components. As totally new vehicles are mixed into a fleet additional spare parts must be purchased and stored. Lost is the opportunity to interchange part s with a large fleet of similar vehicles. Having to inventory similar (but not interchangeable) parts takes up significant store room space and ties up capital dollars. Given that ECA T currently ma in tains a variety of vehicles for the county and others, this concern is less important in Es cambia County than it might be in another transit setting. Training and Operation With a standardized fleet of buses sharing many components and having similar operating characteristics operator and mechanic training becomes much more routine and cost effective. From a maintenance standpoint, the servicing of the vehicles is easier and more like an assembly line operation. On a cautionary note, a driver switching from one vehicle to another must remember that the weight, length, turning radius and braking capabilities of the vehicles ean be quite different. Fuel Costs, Capacity/Range As stated earlier, the fue l capacity of th e van is 33 gallons and the Diamond Coach is 35 gallons, whereas the capacity of the 30-foot Orion II is 100 gallons. The average fuel efficiency for the Orion II buses currently in service at ECAT is 5 0 mpg compared to an average 8.0 mpg for a converted van and 7 5 for the Diamond Coach. I t should be noted that a van in fixed-route service with co nstan t srarting and stopping would have a lower f uel efficiency. The range for an Orion II berween fill ups is approximately 500 miles whereas the range for both the vans and the Diamond Coach is approximately 260 miles. As an example, if a route is I 0 miles in length one-way operates with one bus on one hour headways, in a normal nine hour day of service the vehicle would travel 180 miles. Fo r the Diamond Coach and vans this would necessitate refueling everyday, whereas the Orion Il's fueling would take place every other day PART[: SHORT-TERM STRATEGIES
PENSACOLA URBANIZED AREA TRANSIT IMPROVEMENT STRATEGY The cost for bulk purchased diesel fuel is currently approximately $0.60 per gallon, whereas the cost for unleaded mid-grade gasoline is $0.88 per gallon. Based on the above example, it would cost $21.60 in fuel costs to run the route for one day with the Orion II buses versus $19.80 for the converted vans and $14.40 for the Diamond Coach, a daily savings of only $1.80 and $7.20 respectively. This savings would easily be outweighed (in comparison to the vans) by the costs of refueling the vehicle twice as often. Frequency of Repairs As referenced in other sections, the smaller light-duty Diamond Coach or van of the type discussed in this analysis are not designed for the stop and go nature of fixed route service. Both < vehicles are considered a light-duty vehicle and therefore would be expected to have a higher frequency of repair. ADA Concerns All of the vehicles would meet the minimum requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act regarding accessibility. As noted earlier, the actual capacity of a van in fixed-route service is reduced from 14 passengers to 12 or even I 0 passengers, to allow for one or two wheelchairs aboard the vehicle Farebox Location/Ease of Use Using vans for fixed-route service creates a problem for safe fare collection. In order to accommodate cash fare payments, it is necessary to have a safe and secure farebox While it is not necessary to have a electronic registering farebox, most systems now use these in order to obtain the valuable ridership/fare data they collect. With vans having either a rear or side door entrance to the vehicle, the location of the farebox is critical so as to be accessible to the patron and not be a safety hazard. If the farebox is located near the driver, then the accessibility to the patron is minimized (if not eliminated) thereby requiring the driver to handle cash fares for the patrons. This is neither desirable nor in most cases allowable at almost all transit systems. The Diamond Coach would be capable of accommodating a farebox similar in nature to the Orion II. CHAPTER 4: ANALYSIS OF VANS AND BUSES
CHAPTER 4: ANALYSIS OF VANS AND BUSES Boarding and Alighting Time As previously noted, the vans have entrances from either the side or the rear of the vehicle, and usually not both. The Diamond Coach also has only one entrance on the curb side of the bus. This means that patrons cannot board and alight at the same time, as can be done on the Orion II with both a front and rear-side door. Also, patrons must move over and around others patrons depending on the seating arrangement in the van. Both of these factors will greatly increase the boarding and alighting time, creating longer trip times and increasing the operating costs. The difficulty in maneuvering inside vans in fixed -route service may be a potential hards hi p for the elderly passenger. Safety While no specific data was referenced, it is reasonable to conclude that a heavy-duty transit bus is safer in a collision than a light-duty bus or converted van. Public Perception There are two sides to the story of public perception. On one hand, if the public feels that the transit system is providing better service because a smaller bus or van looks fuller, and perceives that smaller buses or vans are a more cost effective way to provide the service, then the transit system will be perceived in a more positive ligh t. On the other hand, if the gystem becomes unreliable due to the light-duty nature of the vehicles, or if the lowe r capacity results in passing by waiting r i ders at bus stops, then the perception may be more negat ive Imag e of the Transit System CUTR's previous work on the Escambia County transit development plan revealed that the transit system's image was poorly defined in the public eye. The absence of a clear image was traced to the confusing visual appearance of the buses (painted all different colors by advertisers) and to a temporary transfer facility in use after the old downtown center was tom down while the new center was completed. When the new Orion II buses arrived in 1992, ECA T chose not to sell the e xteriors as advertising, and instead painted them all in white and blue The appealing PART/: SHORT-TeRM STRATeGIES Ill
PENSACOLA URBANIZED AREA TRANSIT IMPROVEMENT STRATEGY physical appearance of these buses, which were also smaller than the buses they replaced, provided a strong visual image of the system for the first time. This effect was heightened by the completion of a new, attractive transfer center. The advertising buses are now seen as an interesting variation on the consistent theme provided by the new Orion II buses In addition to being more pleasing to the eye, the new buses promote an image of stability, consistency and reliability for ECA T. The new system logo also improves the image. The effect of adding of vans to the fleet on the image of transit is unclear. ECA T has made great strides over the past two years in improving the system, primarily by providing a consistent visual appearance to the public. As a matter of fact, while ridership remained stagnant prior to the arrival of the new buses, ridership increased by 9.6 percent in 1992 and 6 percent in the past year. T here is a strong possibility that the introduction of smaller light-duty buses or vans to the fixed-route fleet would undercut the sense of stability and reliability. Vans may even appear to be less permanent than buses. The effect of a transit system's image on existing and potential passengers is subtle, but perceptions play a very important role in the decision to use transit. CONCLUSIONS T hree issues stand out in the comparison of smaller light-duty buses and vans versus heavy duty 30-foot buses: cost, efficiency and image and public perception In analyzing costs, some operating costs may be saved through fuel efficiency, but certainly not as much as one might imagine. As stated in the report the significant majority of the cost to operate a transit vehicle in fixed-route service is the driver's wage and benefits The other major factor for total operating expenses is vehicle maintenance. Due to the light-duty nature of the smaller bus and van it is expected that brake and transmission components would need to be replaced on a much shorter cycle than that for heavy-duty buses. Public perception related to the vehicle size and perceived lower operati n g costs remain very important factors when considering the purchase of smaller buses and vans for fixed-ro u te service. One danger is that public perception can be quickly eroded by inferior service. CHAPTER 4: ANALYSIS OF VANS AND BUSES
CHAPTER 4: ANALYSIS OF VANS AND BUSES The ability to standardize a fleets parts inventory is also very importan t when considering the purchase of vehicles. Standardized fleets allow for a sign ificantly smaller parts inventory, and tie up Jess capital dollars in parts. A vehicle mix consisting of different buses and vans can limit scheduling flexibility. Restricted opportunities for interlining due to the lower passenger capacity of smaller buses and vans can result in reduced efficiency and increased operating costs. Other issues which argue against the purchase of smaller light-duty buse s and vans for fixed-route service in clude operator training passenger comfort, v eh icle sa fety and boarding and alighting times. While these issues affect all riders, vans in fixed-route service may pose a particular hardship for the elderly. Smaller buses and vans do have a place in the provision of transit service. Demand responsive service agencies have been using vans quite successfully. Other areas for van use include vanpools, and short distance, low ridership shutt les. The smaller b uses have been used quite successfully in charter service and as airport shu ttle vehicles. Based on the infonnation provided in this analysis, CUTR recommends the continued purchase of 30-foot heavy-duty buses for use in fixed-route service at ECAT. PART/: SHORT-TERM STRATEGIES
This is a blank page
CHAI'H::R 5: ECAT' OUCTJVITY .LUATION Chapter 5 ECAT PRODUCTIVITY EVALUATION INTRODUCTION A major part of any comprehensive operational analysis is an evaluation of th e individual routes that make up the transit system. Service levels typically vary by route and by time of day, depending on the route length, demand tor transit, and t ype of area served. The goal of the service planning process is to match service to demand Thus, as a general rule the most frequently traveled routes should have the greatest frequency, while lightly-utilized routes, often in outlying areas, can have relatively infrequent service. The frequency of weekday bus se rvice at ECA T is one bus per hour on 13 of the 18 current rout e s. The exceptions are Routes 1 and 12 (one bus every other hour during most of the day, with moroo nequent servi ce in the peak periods), Route 2 (a three-hour gap in service during the midday period), Route 16 (one bus every 30 minutes), and Route 18 (peak period limited-stop service only). These frequ encies are typical of small transit agencies in Florida, but it is difficult to attract discretionary riders to the bus system with such infrequent service The route productivity ana lysis identifies routes that perform well and might deserve increased frequencies, as well as routes that perform poorly and might be cut back restruc tu red or discontinued. It should be noted that a performance-based evaluation is only one meas u re of the need for a particular route. Other factors such as service area coverage and the relations h ip of a specific route to the entire transit network a lso must be considered. The focus of this section, however, is on route performance. Productivity measures are described below and are applied to the routes operated by ECAT in fiscal year 1994 These measures arc used to generate an overall ranking of the routes, and each route is then discussed in greater detail. PART/: SHORT-TERM STRATEGIES
+ 6 Figure 22 Escambia County Area Transit Routes Majo r Activity Centers 1. Cordova Mall 2. University Mall 3. University of W Florida Pensacola Jr. Coll99e s Pensacola Regional Airport s Cony Field 1. Naval Air Station 8. Transfer Center I 2 3 5 7A 78 .. ... oe I" 12 .. 15 ,. 18
CHAPTER 5: ECAT PRODUCTIVITY EVALUATION PRODUCTIVITY MEASURES How do we measure the productivity of a transit route? Ridership, revenue, cost and level of service provided are all important factors to be included in an evaluation of this nature. An additional consideration is to employ data that are already be ing collected, so that existing data collection procedures are utilized and the need to gather information is minimized. This productivity evaluation relies on data contained in the Section IS report required by the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) of all transit operators. FY 1994 is the base year for this analysis, even though FT A has not yet had the chance to review and validate the 1994 Section 15 data, because this is the most current information available. Note that Section 15 data are not broken down by weekday and weekend service. Fo r this evaluation, annual da ta combining weekday and weekend service are used. The Section 15 variables of interest include: total passengers; revenue vehicle miles; revenue vehicle hours; total vehicle hours; total re .venue. ECA T collects data by route on all of these variables. In addition, CUTR has calcu l ated two additional variables by rout e: total trips ; total route cost. Trips per route arc figured from ECAT's pub li shed schedules Route cost can be difficult to measure; some transit systems have developed a cost allocation model that takes into account fixed and variable costs. In the absence of such a model for ECAT, route cost is calculated by multiplying the FY 1993 average cost per vehicle hour by the total vehicle hours operated on a particular route. Note that this cost calculation includes fixed costs such as overhead, and thus is likely to be higher than the actual cost of operating the route. Since all route costs are PART 1: SHORT-TERM STRATEGIES
Q "' .... .. Q "i g R ;::: :::! t'1 ... ::! Route Route Name No. 1 East Pen sacola Heights 2 Cordova MaiVPJC 3 Bayv iew 4 T StreeVPalafox 5 Sce n ic Heights 6 Alcaniz/Oavis 7 Oakwood Terrace 8 U'WF/EIIyson Indus Par k 9 University Mall 10a E n sley 10b E nsley 11 Myrt le Grove 12 Saufley/George Stone 1 3 9th Avenue/Aragon Court 14 NAS/Navy Boulevard 15 Navy PoinVBarrancas Avenue 16 Pal afox/Downtown 17 Cantonment 18 Blu e Ange l Exp res s Spec Special Total Table 9 P e rformance Input Variables FY 1994 Total Revenue Revenue Riders MllflS Hours 16.279 32 999 1 758 43,546 25,947 2,643 45,293 54,559 4,632 42,647 40,470 3,777 106, 591 81,231! 5,674 60,605 41,411 4,044 66,196 31!,731 3,316 2,637 9 ,285 552 80, 5 2 6 9 1,683 6,688 50,160 70,745 5,230 53,31!5 69,379 4,797 94,231! 66,193 3,856 21,407 37,402 2,007 71,966 49,669 3 862 115,385 116,145 6,795 105,808 64,483 5 4 53 126,786 44,359 3 340 1,262 5,783 253 8,849 35,818 2,583 6 391 3,618 270 1 121,956 999,916 71,532 Total Total Hours Trips 1,965 2,040 2,651 2 ,550 4,827 3,360 3,903 3 915 6 ,108 3,915 4 723 4,220 3,566 6,770 656 448 7 808 4 ,680 5,591 3 ,615 5 ,231 3 ,665 4,407 3,915 2,104 2,040 4,170 3 ,915 6,943 3,865 5,739 3,815 3 761 6 720 331 32 8 3,144 1,78 5 283 na 77,911 65, 561 Formula route cost is based on FY 1994 total hours multiplied by FY 1 993 average cost per total hour ($43.23) Total Formula Rev41nue Rl Cost $8 ,939 $84,966 $25 ,82 3 $114,594 $ 25,370 $208,667 $25,512 $168,733 $63,503 $264,043 $34,998 $204,185 $37,967 $154,170 $1,532 $28,341 $ 51,351 $337,533 $32,454 $241,715 $33,032 $226,125 $54,600 $ 190,536 $13 ,315 $90 962 $41,982 $180,251 $69,516 $300,146 $65,599 $248,081 $75,351 $162,607 $807 $ 1 4, 294 $5,997 $135,904 $1,598 $12,244 $669,24 7 $3,368,097
CHAPTER 5: ECAT PRODUCTIVITY EVALUATION calculated in the same manner, the net effect is to distribute all fixed costs by route in proportion to the vehicle hours operated. Route-level data for each of the eight variables used as input to the productivity evaluation process are shown in Table 9. Performance measures can then be constructed from these variables. Th i s analysis is modeled on procedures used at HARTline in Tampa to monitor performance, and incorporates six productiv ity measures: revenue/cost ratio; revenue per revenue mile; revenue per rev enue hour; passengers per reve nue mile; passengers per revenue hour; passengers per trip. It should be noted that two of the routes in Table 9, Route 8 (UWF!Eilyson Industr i al Park) and Route 17 (Cantonment) were discontinued during FY 1994 The data for Route 17 represent two months of operation, while the data for Route 8 cover three months of service. The "Special" route reflects service provided for special events. In addition, Routes 7 A (Oakwood Terrace/ Montclair) and 7B (Oakwood Terrac e/Ebonwood) are analyzed jointly as Route 7. Revenue/cost ratio is calculated by dividing revenue by cost. This is sometimes referred to as the farebox recovery ratio, since it is a measure of the percentage of total costs recovered through fares paid by passengers. This ratio is the only cost-based indicator in the analysis and it is a standard measure in widespread use in the transit industry Revenue is addressed in rwo other measures. Revenue per revenue mile is total revenue divided by revenue vehicle miles. This reflects the revenue obtained in a typical mile of bus service. Similar ly revenue per revenue hour is total revenue divided by revenue vehicle hours, and reflects the revenue obtained per vehicle in a typical hour of bus service. PART 1: SHORT-TERM STRATEGIES
PENSACOLA URBANIZED A.REA TRANSIT IMPROVEMENT STRATEGY Transit ridership is the focus of the remaining three measures. Passengers per revenue mile is the total passengers d i vided by revenue vehicle miles. Passengers per revenue hour is obtained by dividing the total number of passengers by revenue vehicle hours. Passengers per trip is the average number of hoardings on a single trip, and is calculated by dividing the number of passengers by the number of vehicle trips The E CA T rout e structure is composed primarily of routes operating in loops (as opposed to a grid) and meeting at the transfer center. Thus, a trip is defined as starting and ending at the transfer center. These three indicators can be characterized as measures of effectiven e ss since they calculate the amount of service consumed per unit of service provided PRODUCTIVITY EVALUATION The first step in the evaluation process is to calculate the six productivity measures by route and for the system as a whole. Then, for each individual measure, a route's performance is compared to the overall system performance. This comparison is done by taking the ratio of the route value to the sy s tem value. Once this process is completed for all six mea5lu-es, a final score is calculated for each route as the average of the six performance ratios. This score i s used to rank the routes. T able I 0 presents the productivity evaluation measures for all routes and for the system, while Figure 23 provides a graphic display of each route's performance. Table II demonstrates how the final score is calculated using Route I as the example. Route l's revenue/cost ratio is 10.52 percent, or 53 percent of the system s revenue/cost ratio (19.87 percent). Revenue per revenue mile for Route I is $0.27, 40 percent of the systemwide average of$0.67. Route J's re v enue per revenue hour is $5.08, yielding a ratio of 0.54 compared to the system's $9.36 Ratios for the remaining three variables are 0.44 for passengers per revenue mile (0.49 for Route I, 1.12 for th e sy s tem), 0.59 for passengers per rev enue hour (9.26 for Route I, 15. 68 for the system), and 0 .47 for average passengers per trip (7.98 for Route I, 17.02 for the system). The score for Route 1 is the average of these s i x scores, shown as 0.496 in Table II. This score is rel atively low, and produces a ranking o f 1 7 for Route 1 out of the 20 routes shown, as seen in Table II and Figure 23. CHAPTER 5: ECAT PRODUCTIVITY EVALUATION
"' "-1 :-;. !::l c "' ... "-' Route No. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10a 10b 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 S pec Revenue Route Name Cost Rallo East Pensacola Heights 10.52% Cordov a MatVP JC 22.53% Bayview 12. 16% T StreeVPalafox 15.12% Scenic Heights 24.05% Alcaniz/Davis 17.14% Oakwood Terrace 24. 63% UWF/E I Iyson Indus Park 5.40% Unive r s ity Mall 15. 21% Ensley 13.43% Ensley 14.61% Myrtle G rove 28. 66% Saufley/George Stone 1 4.64 % 9th Avenue/Aragon Court 23. 29% NAS/Navy Boule vard 23.16% Navy Po i nt/Ba rrancas Aven ue 26.44% Pa l afox/Oowntown 46.34% Cantonment 5 65% B lue Angel Express 4.41% Special 13.05% ECAT System 19.87 % Table 10 P e rforman ce Evaluation Measures FY 1994 Revenue per Revenue pe r Passengers Revenue Revenue per Revenue Mile Hour Mile $0.27 $5.08 0 .49 $1.00 $9.77 1.68 $0.46 $5.48 0 .83 $0 .63 $6.75 1.05 $0.78 $11.19 1 .3 1 $0.85 $8.65 1.46 $0 98 $11.45 1.76 $0.16 $2 .78 0.28 $0. 56 $7.68 0.88 $0.46 $6.21 0.71 $0.48 $6.89 0.77 $0. 82 $14.16 1.42 $0.36 $6.63 0 57 $0.85 $10 87 1.45 $0.60 $10.23 0.99 $0.78 $12 03 1 25 $1. 70 $22.56 2.88 $0.14 $3.19 0.22 $0.17 $2.32 0 .25 $ 0.44 $5.92 1 77 $ 0.67 $9.36 1.12 Passengers .' Average per Passengers Score Rank Revenue Hour per Trip 9.26 7.98 0.496 17 16. 4 8 17.08 1.203 6 9.78 13.48 0.675 15 11 29 10.89 0.787 12 18.78 27.23 1 257 4 14.98 14.36 1 026 9 20.56 10.07 1.233 5 4.78 5.89 0 .286 18 12.0 4 17 .21 0.831 1 1 9 .59 13.88 0.681 1 4 11.12 14 .56 0.739 13 24.44 24.07 1 405 2 1 0.67 10.49 0.631 16 18.64 18.39 1.193 7 1 6.98 29.85 1.146 8 19.40 27. 73 1.293 3 37.96 18.8 7 2.226 1 4 .98 3.85 0.262 19 3.43 4.96 0 242 20 23.67 NA 1 .006 10 1 5.68 17 .0 2
Q .. "' "'! g t'1 .... <: 0 u en 2 5 2 1 5 1 0.5 0 16 11 15 5 7 Figure 23 ECAT Route Performance 2 13 14 6 Spec 9 4 108 10A 3 12 1 8 17 18 Route
CHAPTER 5: ECAT PRODUCTIVITY EVALUATION Table 11 Example of Productivity Calculations Performance Measure Route 1 ECAT System Ratio Revenue/Cost Ratio 10.52% 19.87% 0.53 Revenue per Revenue Mile $0.27 $0.67 0.40 Revenue per Revenue Hour $5.08 $9.36 0 54 Passengers pe r Revenue M ile 0.49 1.12 0 .44 Passengers per Revenue Hour 9.26 15.68 0.59 Passengers per Trip 7.98 17 02 0.47 Total Score for Route 1 0.496 Interpretation of the individual and final scores may be made without reference to the route rankings A score of 1.00 means that the route's performance is on a par with the system performance. A score of greater than 1 .00 represents above-average performance, while a score of less than 1.00 is below average. Route 16 (Palafox/Downtown) is ranked first by a wide margin. In fact, Route 16 was best in each of the performance measures As noted earlier, Route 16 has the most frequent service (one bus every 30 minutes), and it is also the most di rect link between the Transfer Cente r and downtown Pensacola Other routes scoring above 1.25 include Route ll (Myrtle Grove), Route 5 (Scenic Heights) and Route 15 (Navy Point/Barrancas Ave.). The poorest performer among the routes is Route 18, the Blue Angel Express. This route began service in March 1993. As the newest route in ECAT's system, the Blue Angel Express is not expected to perform at the same level as more established routes. This route also differs in that it is operated as a limited-stop service and is intended to attract discretionary riders to the transit system. As the ridership survey results show, Route 18 is the only ECAT route to have a significant proportion of ridership with incomes above $30,000. Any new service takes time to mature and to build its market. Route 18 is funded through FOOT s U rban Corridor Program, and state funds pay for all of its operating expenses At the end of the three year demonstration period, ECA T will decide whether ridership warrants continued operation of this route PAR T 1: SHORT TERM STRATEGIES
PENSACOLA URBANIZED AREA TRANSIT LWPROVEMENT STRATEGY Other routes scoring be low 0 50 include Route 17 (Cantonment), Route 8 (UWF/Ellyson industrial Park) and Route I (East Pensacola Heights). Route 17 has been discontinued due to low ridership and high expenses. Route 8 has been discontinued as a separate route, although three daily trips are operated to UWF as Route 98, a branch of Route 9. Route I is still in operation. Incidentally, an identical productivity evaluation was performed without the discontinued routes, but the service on these routes was so minor in comparison to overall ECA T service that there was virtually no change in the results. The route productivity evaluation technique provides an objective means to assess the performance of individual routes within the context of the overall bus network. T his evaluation might best be used as an "early warning system" indicating that there is a problem with a given route. ECA T can then examine options to improve route performance. One of the strengths of this technique is tha t it uses data already being collected, and thus can be easily implemented by ECAT at little or no cost. Other factor s that may be important in deciding on a course of action are t h e availability of alternate transit service along a route the desired geographic area coverage, and the length of time the route has been operating. The Blue Angel Express as noted ear li er, is v i ewed properly as a new type of service that will hopefully build a market over time; thus, its performance in FY 1994 is not treated in the same way as other routes. In other cases, if a route is the only one to provide service to a particular area of the county, it may be continued despite, poor performance if there is a perceived need to serve that neighborhood or area. CHA PTER 5: ECAT P RODUCTIVITY E V ALUATION
CHAPTER 5: ECAT PRODUCTIVITY EVALUATION The following se<:tion summarizes the performance of each route. Strengths and weaknesses are noted, and candidate routes for more detailed consideration are identified PART[: SHORT-TERM STRATEGIES
PENSACOLA URBANIZED AREA TRANSIT LIIPROVEMENT STRATEGY INDI VIDUA L ROUTE EVALUA TION Route 1 East Pensaco la Heights Description: Route I and Route 3 operate in opposite directions along the same loop with Route I traveling in a clockwise direction Route I serves Cordova Mall, East Pensacola Heights along Bayou Boulevard, East Hill and Texar Drive. Route I has service every two hours for most of the day, with somewhat greater frequencies in the morning and afternoon peak periods. There is no Saturday servtce. Score: 0.496 Rank: 17 Strengths: East Hill has a high proportion of elderly population and moderate density, while the Texar Drive route segment travels through a low-income area. Routes I and 3 provide the only service to East Hill and East Pensacola Heights. Weaknesses: Route I ranks at the bottom of local routes still in operation. Its routing is circuitous as it leaves Bayou Boulevard and 12th Avenue to wind through residential neighborhoods It does not offer direct service to a central de stination along most of its route (although it is a con venient return route from Cordova Mall to the neighborhoods it serves) Although it travels close to downtown, i t does not provide direct service to downtown. Action: Prime candidate for major restructure or elimination. CHA PTER 5 : CAT PRODUCTIVITY EVALUATION
Figure 24 Route 1 East Pensacola Heights + z z. r-1) z z. (J) 0 10 :1 "' 92 92 (I) z m PART 1: SHORT-TERM STRATEGIES
Rml/e 2 Cordova Ma/1/P JC Description: Route 2 serves Cordova Mall Pensacola Junior College (PJC), Sacred Heart Hospital, and the Pensacola Regional Airport. Route 5 provides similar service from the Transfer Center to the Cordova/PJC/Sacred Heart area, while Rou t e 9 provides similar service i n the opposite direction. Score : Rank: Strengths: Route 2 generally leaves the Transfer Center every hour on the half-hour except at II : 30 a.m. and 12:30 p.m. There is no Saturday service. 1.203 6 Route 2 provides the most direct service to Cordova Mall, Pensacola Junior College (P JC), Sacred Hea rt Hospital, and the Pensacola Regional Airport. Route 2 is the onl y local bus to travel into the airport (the Blue Angel Express also serves the airport directly). The Cordova/P JC/Hosp ital complex is a major activity center in Escambia County. Route 2 is a compact, well defined route s ervin g major destinations. Weaknesses: None identified Action: Additional service may be warranted to eliminate the present midday gap. CHAPTER 5: ECAT /'ROI>UCttvi7T EVAtUATION
z r-(J) -Center z -o a 'f. Fi gu re 2 5 Route 2 Codova Maii / PJC z z 0 '% (/) g2 (1)
..;.;_ ___ PENSAC IRBANlZEI TRANSIT ?VEMENT STRA1L
z r en -z m ..... ..... 0 z "U Figure 26 R o u te 3 + z z 0
Route 4 T Street/Palafox J:."NSACOLI 1.-HIIANIZI::< "IlEA TRANSIT l.1tPROVEMENT STRA TEGY Description: Route 4 serves the Brownsville neighborhood, including its Plea Market area, and downtown. While not the most direct route between the Transfer Center and downtown, Route 4 directly serves City Hall and the Judicial Center. Route 4 lea ves the Transfer Center every hour on the hour on weekdays and Saturday. Score: 0.787 Rank: 12 Strengths: Brownsville has the greatest residential density and the highest proportion of low income households in all of Escambia County, as well as a considerable number of households without a private vehicle and a large elderly population. Route 4 travels along a relatively direct path to downtown from the west. Weaknesses: Given the transit-dependent nature of the neighborhoods it traverses, it is somewhat surprising that Route 4 does not have a higher score. Action: Route 4 is below average, but performs acceptably. No action is recommended. CHAPTER 5: ECAT PROO(!CTJVITY EVALUATION
Figur e 27 Route 4 T Street/Palafox z z r "'0 z en 0 .... z z (/) iJ Cfl Cfl ll> () CD Ill < z c. m en Garden St
VRBANIZL. f:A TRAI\' S I I l.ttPROVML..YT STRATEGY Rout e 5 Scenic Heights D escription: Route 5 and Route 9 travel along the same l oop in opposite directions, with Route 5 traveling in a counter-clockwise direction. Route 5 serves the Cordova!PJC/Hospital complex, Scenic Heights to the northeast West Fl o rida Hospital, University Mall and Davis Highway. Service was recently extended to the Moorings Apartme n ts in the Scenic Heights area. Route 2 provides similar service from the Transfer Center to the Cordo va!P JC/Sacred Heart area. Route 5 generally leaves the Transfer Center every hour on the hour o n weekdays and Saturdays. Score: 1.257 Rank : 4 Strengths: Route 5 provides direct service from t h e Tran s fer C e nter to th e Cordova/ P JC / Hospital Complex, a major activity center. Route 5 is clearly the more successful of the two paired routes on the loop. Route 5 ranks fourth overall, and third in terms of average passenger s per trip, while Route 9 ranks eleventh. Weakn es ses : Route 5 is a long loop route, serving both the Ninth Avenu e and Davis Highway corridors in conjunction with Route 9. There is also a lengthy detour from Ninth A venue to serve Old Spanish Trail northeast of the airport. A ction: It may make sense to split Routes 5 and 9 into separat e routes one servi n g Ninth Avenue and the other serving Davis Highway The Old Sp a nish Trail portion of th e route also deserves closer examination. CHAPTER 5: ECAT PRODUCTIVITY EVALUATION
Figure 28 Route 5 Scenic Heights 1-10 Road Ave +
PENSACOL,I UR;;, tNIZED 'RAN: . PROVE.. :.\'7' STivtJI.iiY Route 6 Alcaniz!Davis D es cription: Route 6 connects the Transfer Cen ter and downtown through a portion o f the East Hill neighborhood and low-income residential areas north of downtown and just cast of 1-110. In the downtown area, Route 6 directly serves City Hall and the Judicial Center via a loop also travelled in the opposite direction by Route 13. Route 6 leaves the Transfer Center every hour on the halfhour on weekdays and Saturday. Score: 1.026 Rank: 9 Strengths: Route 6 serves transit-dependent neighborhoods, providing residents with access to downtown and to the Transfer Cen ter. Weaknesses: There is some overlap between Route 6 and Route 13, which uses Ninth Avenue, a few block s to the east of Alcaniz/Davis Streeis. Action: Route 6 has the score closest to 1.00 suggesting that it is the most "typical" route in t erms of performance. No immediate action is recommended, but there is a possibility of combining Routes 6 and 13 to create a s tronger route with more frequent service. It may also be possible to shorten the length o f the loop at the downtown end of the route CltAP1'ER 5: ECAT PROOUCI'IVI1'Y EVALUATION
z ,.... (/) -z ""0 $ll (')
PENSn URBANIZ: ..,;A IMPROV6Mt:NT STRATEGY Routes 7A and 7B Oakwood Terrace Description: Routes 7A and 79 serve Oakwood Te rrace along the same basic loop in opposite directions. Route 7 A also serves the Montclair subdivision, w hile Route 7B provides service to the Ebonwood area Sel ected trips (two per day on weekdays on each route) serve the Pollak Rehabilitation workshop directly. Route 7A leaves the Transfer Center every hour on the half-hour, and Route 7B leaves the Transfer Center every hour on the hour on weekdays. There are eight Saturday trips on Route 7 A and five Saturday trips on Route 7B. Route statistics are not kept separately for the two routes Score: 1.233 Rank: 5 Strengths: Routes 7 A and 7B provide the only transit service in residential areas to the immediate northwest of the Transfer Center. There is a substantial number of low income households in these areas. These routes are above average in terms of productivity. Weaknesses: The 7B routing is circuitous south of Fairfield Drive. Action: No action is recommended. CHAPTER 5 : ECAT PRODUC TIVITY EVALUATION
Figure 30 Routes 7 A and 7B Oakwood Terrace 78 W Bobe St z z -u !ll (") CD OJ -< a. j 7A 2 r (/) Tra Center z m en -
PENSACOLA URBANIZED AREA TRANSIT IMPROVEMENT STRATEGY Route 9 University Mall Description : Route 9 and Route 5 travel along the same loop in opposite directions, with Route 9 travel i ng in a clockwise direction. Route 9 serves Davis Highway, Universi ty Mall, West Florida Hospital, Scenic Heights, and the Cordova/PJC/Hospital complex. Service was recently extended to the Moorings Apartments in the Scenic Heights area. Route 2 provides similar service from the Cordova/P JC/ Sacred Heart complex to the Transfer Center. Route 9S provides limited service to UWF and Azalea Trace via a branch from the Route 9 routing, following the former Route 8 alignment. Route 9 leaves the Transfer Center every hour on the half-hour on weekdays and Saturdays. Route 9S operates three trips daily on weekdays only. Sco re : 0.831 Rank: II Strengths: Route 9 provides direct service from the Transfer Center to University Mall, one of the two major shopping centers in Eseambia County, and alw serves Davis Highway, a busy north-south thoroughfare. Weaknesses: Route 9 i s less productive than Route 5, which ranks third overall and second terms of ave rage passeng ers per trip. As noted in the Route 5 discussion, Route 9 is a long loop route, serving both the Ninth Avenue and Davis Highway corridors. There is a ls o a lengthy detour from Ninth Avenue to serve Old Spanish Trail northeast of the airport Action: It may make sense to split Routes 5 and 9 into separate routes, one serving Ninth Avenue and the other serving Davis Highway. The Old Spanish Trail portion of the route also de serves closer examina tio n. "liAPTER. 4T PR.f -: >"/YITY Er "1!.-fT/ON
Fi g u re 31 Routes 9 and 9S University Mall/ University of West Florida t t +
PENSACOLA URBANIZED AREA TRANSIT IMPROVEMENT STRATEGY Rowe 1 OA Ensley Description: Route lOA and Route lOB trave l along the same loop in opposite d ire ctions, with Route I OA traveling in a clockwise direction. Route I OA serves the Ens l ey, Lincoln Park, Old Palafox and Wedgewood areas, primarily via Old Palafox Highway and Pensacola Boulevard. Route I OA leaves t he Transfer Center every hour o n the half-hour on weekdays and every two hours on Saturdays. Score: 0.681 Rank : 14 Strengths: Routes I OA and I OB provide the only transit service to the communitie s a lon g the loop. Weaknesses: Rou t e lOA is a poor performer, ranking higher than only Routes I, 3 and 12 among current l ocal rou t es. It is a long, ci rcuitous loop with several deviations from the major streets (especially Pensaco l a Bou l evard) to serv e particular locations. Action: Given the l a ck luster performance of Route I OB, the possibility of combining the two loop routes i nto a single route should be considered The loop could also be streamlined. : CAT PRw < .TIVITY E,-..1: IT/ON
P ART[: SHORT-TERM STRATEGIES Figure 32 Route 10A Ensley E Ollve Rood I 10 Road
PENSACOLA URBANIZED AREA TI!ANSIT IMPI!OVEMENT STI!ATEGY Route JOB Ensley Description: Route I OB and Route I OA travel along the same loop in opposite directions, with Rout e I OB traveling in a counter-clockwise direction. Route I OB serves the HRS Center, Ensley, Lincoln Park, Old Palafox and Wedgcwood areas, primarily via Pensacola Boulevard Old and Palafox Highway. On most weekday trips, thi s route also serves the VA Clinic. Route I OB leaves the Transfer Center every hour on the hour on weekdays, and every two hours on Saturdays. Score: 0. 739 Rank : 13 Strengths: Routes I OB and lOA provide the only transit service to the communities along the loop. Weaknesses: Route lOB is marginally better than Route I OA in terms of productivity (possibly due to its service to HRS), but is still below average in terms of performance. It is a long, circuitous loop, with several deviations from the major streets (especially Pensacola Boulevard) to serve particular locat ions. Action: Given the poor performance of Route I OA, the possibility of combining the two loop routes into a single route should be considered. The loop could also be stream lined. C' :1! 5: EC.-11 i 'RODUCT/V/1" : : : ti.UAT/0{'1
! PART 1: SHORT-TERM STRATEGIES Figure 33 Route 10B Ensley EOiive RO&d Road
PENSACOLA URBANIZED AREA TRANSIT IMPROVEMENT STRATEGY Route 1 J Myrtle Grove Description: Route II serves the Brownsville West Pensacola and Myrtle G ro ve areas and the Mariner Mall. The route loops through Myrtle Grove in one direct i on only. Route II leaves the Transfer Center every hour on the half-hour on weekdays and Saturday. Score: 1.405 Rank: 2 Strengths: Brownsville has the greatest residential density and the highest proportion of low income hou s eholds in all of Escambia County, as well as a considerable number of households without a private vehicle and a large elderly population. Route II also provides the only transit service to Myrtle Grove. The route h as the second best performance ranking of all E CA T routes. Weaknesses: No weaknesses are identified. Action: Route II is a prime candidate for more frequent service, one bus every 30 minutes. (": 5: ECAT Pu" nUCTIVITY F :.: : :.o1 '/0N
lev F>tl d Rood \ 9 Fairfield Or PART/: SHORT-TERM STRATEGIES Figure 34 Rou t e 11 Myrtle Grove l
PENSACOLA URBANIZED AREA TRANSIT IMPROVEMENT STRATEGY Route 12 Saujley!George Stone Descri ption: Route 12 serves the northwest Pensacola area, including Bell view and the George Stone Vocational Technical Center directly, and loop s throug h Oakcliff, A vondal e and Cerny Heights on its return trip to the Transfer Center. Route 12 leaves the Transfer Center every hour on the half hour during the morning peak period, and every two hours at other times. The re is no Saturday service. Score: 0.631 Rank: 16 St rengths: The George Stone Vocational Technical Center is a major attracto r for this route wh ic h also provides the only transit service to the north and west of Fairfield Drive and Mobile Highway. Weaknesses: Route 12 is the second-worst local route still in op e ration in terms of productivity. Action: Its routing is indirect on the return trip to the Transfer Center and the communities served by the return loop can only ride in one direction. The route might perform better if it were streamlined to operate along Mobile Highway in both directions although th is would eliminate transi t service in Oakcliff, Avondale and Cerny Heights. Service might be further reduced by matching route operation to peak demand times at George Stone Vocational Technical Center. 5 : ECAT f',,, , 'CT/VITI' F.r , UATION
I !i' FairtoldOr PART I : SHORT-TERM S T IIA TEGIES F i gu re 35 R ou te 1 2 W Sl
PENSACOLA URBANIZE[) AREA TRANSIT IMPROVEMENT STRATEGY Route 13 Ninth Avenue/Aragon Cou rt Desc ription: Route 13 serves low-income residential areas north and east of downtown, including Aragon Court and Gonzalez Court. In the downtown area, Route 13 operates on a loo p in the opposite direction from Route 6 and serves City Hall and the Judicial Center Route 13 leaves the Transfer Center every hour on t he half hour on weekdays and Saturday Score: 1.193 Rank: 7 Streng ths : Route 13 serves transit-dependent neighborhoods, providing residents with access to downtown and to the Transfer Center. Weaknesses: There is some overlap between Route 13 and Route 6, which uses Alcaniz aod Davis Street s, a few blocks west of Ninth Avenue. Act i on: ..... Route 13 i s above average in terms of productivity. No immediate action is recommended, but there is a possibility of combi ning Routes 13 and 6 to create a stronger route with more frequent service. Route 13 might also be streamlined by eliminating the mid-route detour to 12th Avenue IPTER 5: Fr IT PRODI/f' r y EVALI' ;-rn,y
z r (f) -S t f-igure 36 Route 13 9th Avenue-Aragon Court PART 1: SHORT TERM STRATEGJt:S
PENSACOLA URBANIZED AREA TRANSIT IMPROVEMENT STRATEGY Route 14 Naval Air StatioliNavy Boulevard Description: Route 14 links the Transfer Center, downtown, the Naval A ir Station (NAS), Corry Field, Navy Hospital, the Navy Exchange Shopping Center and the Warrington and Navy Boulevard areas. A long, busy route, Route 14 has the greatest number of revenue miles and revenue hours in ECA T's system. Route 14 leaves the Transfer Center every h our on the half-hour on weekdays, and every hour on the hour except in tbe midday period on Saturday. Score: 1.146 Rank: 8 Strengths: Route 14 serves NAS, the largest employer in Escarnbia County. Route 14 rank s first in average passengers per t r ip Weaknesses : Route 14 takes 28 minutes to travel through the various sections of NAS. This is the longest route in the ECA T system, with a round-trip time of just under two hours. Action: The route is above average in terms of productivity, but would be helped if the Navy were to operate a shuttle covering part or all of the NAS. ECA T might also explore whether every trip needs to serve Navy Hospital and Corry Field. CHAP1 'AT PRODI , ry EVALU, f'IION
f alifi eld O r F i gure 37 Route 14 Naval Air Station PART 1: SHORT-TERM STRATEGIES
PeNSACOLA URBANIZED AREA TR,JNSIT [MPROVEMJj"NT STRATEGY Route 15 Navy Point/Barrancas Avenue Description: Route 15 serves down tow n, Baptist Hospital, North Hill, Barrancas Avenue and Warrington with branches to Navy Point and Beach Haven. Route 15 leaves the T ransfer Center every hour on the on weekdays, and every hour on the hour except in the m idday period on Saturday. Weekday buses alternate between the two branches, while all Saturday buses serve Navy Point. Score: Rank: Strengths: 1.293 3 Route 15 ranks third in terms of productivity. It serves transit-dependent neighborhoods between the Transfer Center and downtown. Weaknesses: No weaknesses are identified Action: Route 15 is a candida te for more frequent service, one bus every 30 minutes. CJJAI', "JTY Ev.-
Fi g u re 38 Route 15 Navy Point/ Barrancas F al lfie ld O r
PENSACOLA URBANIZED AREA TRANSIT IMPROVEMENT STRATEGY Route I 6 Palajox/Downrown Descr iption : Route 16 provi des a direct connection between the Transfer Center and downtown via Palafox Street. Route 16 leaves the Transfer Center every 30 minutes on weekdays, and every hour on the half-hour on Saturday. Score: 2 .226 Rank: I Strengths : Route 16 i s far and away the most productive route in the ECAT system. It provides the most direct route between the Transfer Center and d owntown, and is the only route that operates on a 30-minute headway The route serves a clearly defined market (passengers transferring from elsewhere in the system to downtown) with a direct route and frequent service. Route 16 r.mks first on five of the six productivity measures. Weaknesses: No weaknesses are identified. Action: Route 16 is a candidate for more frequent service, possibly one bus every 20 or even every 15 minut es . ,,APTE eCAT PRODUC1'WITY EVALUATION
z r en -z m St PIIRT /: SHORTT E RM STRATE G IES Figure 39 R o ute 1 6 Pa l afox z z 0
PENSACOLA URBANIZED AR6A TRANSIT IMPROV6MNT STRATEGY Route 18 Blue Angel Express Description: Route 18 i s the newest (March 1993 ) route in the ECAT system, funded through a State Urban Corridor grant for a three-year demonstration period It operates in limited-stop service from the Pensacola Regional Airport to the Naval Air Station duri n g peak morn ing and afternoon hours. Route I 8 also serves residential areas in the Northeast area of Pensacola the Transfer Center, Cordova Mall, and other park-and-ride lot locations It is intended to be an express route to NAS. Route 1 8 makes four morning trips and three afternoon trips on weekdays. There is no Saturday service Score: 0.242 Rank: 20 Strengths: Route 18 is building ridership gradually, and has been successful in attracting a greater proportion of middle-income riders. Weaknesses: Route 18 is the lowest-ranked of all ECAT routes in terms of productivity Action: Route 18 should be continued in service with the recognition that it take s time to attract discretionary riders to a new service concept. CHA1'1 'ER : ECAT J' ; TtVtTY Er:Ci.fiATtoN
Figure 40 Route 18 Blue Angel Express 1 1 j f
PENSACOLA URBANIZED AREA TRANSIT IMPROVEMENT STRATEGY Route 8 UWF//yson Industrial Park Description: Route 8 which has been discontinued as a separate route was the only wute in ECAT's system that did not originate at the Transfer Center. It operated in hourly service between Cordova Mall and the Unive rs ity of West Florida, also serving West Florida Hospital and Azalea Trace It was discontinued in December 1993. Score: 0.286 Rank: 18 Strengths: This route provided the only service to UWF. Weaknesses: Route 8 was underutilized Its score was second-lowest among local bus routes Action: Route 8 has been discontinued, with service to UWF n ow provided by three trips daily on an extension of Route 9 (known as Route 9S). Route 9S operates as a regular Route 9 bus until West Florida Hospital, then follows the former Route 8 alignment to Azalea Trace and UWF (see Rout e 9 map). fiR 5: /!CAT PRODI 'IVITY E t l ! 'tTION
CHAPTER 5: ECAT PRODUCTIVITY EVALUATION Route 17 Cantonment Description: Route 17, which was discontinue
PENSACOLA URBANIZED AREil TRANSIT IMPROVEMENT STRATEGY PROD UCTMTY EVALUATION FOR SA T URDAY SERV ICE As noted earlier, the productivity rankings by route were developed using Section 15 data which do not distinguish between wee k day and Saturday figures. Howeve r Saturday ridership can give a good indication of the nature of non-work trips. By s h owing whic h routes are utilized most for non-work purposes Saturday ridership can provide guidance on the )lQtential for weekday evening service, as discussed in Chapter 7. The data utilized to analyze Saturday ridership were obtained from ECAT farebox data for April and September of 1994. Ridecheck data from sample counts done as part of the Section 15 data collection effort were used to check the va l idity of the April and September data Tab l e 12 summarizes the information o n Saturday ridership Average number of Saturday passengers during April and September of 1994, number of trips each route offers on Saturdays, and the average number of riders per trip each route carries are all included in Table 12. Passengers per trip is the only measure of productivity available for Saturday, and the data indicate that Route 5 is t he most productive route on Saturdays with 21 passengers per trip Route 9 follows this with almost 21 passengers per r oute. Both routes _serve sh opp i ng areas (Cordova and University Malls) whi ch generate considerable non-work trips R oute 16, which serves the downtown Pensacola business district, is one of the busiest routes during the week; however, it ranks second to last on Saturdays. This is a good example showing how the Saturday ridership differs from weekday ridership, and why it should be incorporated in order to understand which routes are used most frequently in non-peak periods. CHAPTER 5: ECAT PRODUCTlVITY EVALUATION
CHAPTER 5: ECAT PROD UCTIVITY E VALUATION Table 12 ECAT Saturday Ridership Average N umber of Riders per Route Destination Saturday Trips Trip Ridership 5 Sce nic Heights 257 12 21.4 9 University Mall 247 12 20.6 11 Myrtle G r ove 223 12 18.6 14 Naval Air S t atio n 140 10 1 4 0 10A Ens l ey 78 6 13 0 15 Navy Point 119 10 11. 9 108 Enstey 82 7 11. 7 13 Aragon Court 140 12 1 1.7 3 Bayv i ew 68 6 11.3 4 T Street 1 32 12 11.0 6 Alcaniz/Davis 13 1 13 10.1 16 Palafox Street 120 12 10 0 7 Oakwood Te rrace 85 13 6.5 Total 1,822 137 1 3.3 PART/: SHORT-TERM STRATEGIES
This is a blank page
CHAPTER 6: DEVELOPMENT OF SERVlCE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS Chapter 6 DEVELOPMENT OF SERVICE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS INTRODUCTION The Route Productivity Evaluation in Chapter 5 ranked ECAT's routes based on a composite score derived from six separate measures of productivity: operating ratio; revenue per revenue mile; revenue per revenue hour; riders per revenue mile; riders per revenue hour; riders per trip. The development of service performance standards builds on this evaluation by specifying minimum standard s for each route to meet. Several transit properties in Florida and nationwide, have developed performance measures or planning guidelines to help them in making decisions to change levels of service on specific routes. In some cases, the governing body of the transit agency (Board of Directors or Board of County Commissioners) has formally adopted the guidelines. At other agencies, the guidelines are used within the agency as informal standards. There are also cases where the governing body is awa re of the existence of guidelines but has not formally adopted them. The purposes of service performance standards are twofold First, these standards establish quantifiable meas ures that can be used to gauge the performance of an individual route. Second the standards provide a minimum acceptable performance level for a route on an objecti v e basis. Standards are often seen as a means to make decisions about transit service based on performance criteria, with minimal reliance on the political process. The danger of performance standards is that they can be applied blindly and inflexibly, without regard for external factors which deserve to be considered. This negative aspect, which applies to guidelines of any type, is one reason that many transit agencies use service standards as a first step in gauging a route's per formance. Standards can flag routes which do not perform well for further analysis. A route is discontinued only after all alternatives have been examined, not only PART I: SHORT-TERM STRATEGIES
PENSACOLA URJIANIZED AREA TRANSIT IMPROVEMENT STRATEGY because it failed to meet the minimum standards. Thus, the ideal application of performance standards is as a guide in making service decisions, not as ironclad, inflexible rules. Most agencies that employ service performance standards find them to be a useful decision making tool. Guidelines used by several different agencies in Florida are reviewed in the next section. These agencies range in size, but take similar approaches in establishing guidelines. The transit agencies include: Hillsborough Area Regiona l Transit (HARTline), Tampa Pinellas Suncoast Transit Authority (PSTA), St. Petersburg/Clearwater Taltran, Tallahassee Palm Beach County Transportation Authority (CoTran), West Palm Beach Metro-Dade Transit Agency (MDTA), Miami As a point of comparison, information on service guidelines at MTA-New York City Transit, the largest transit agency in the United States, is also included. While acceptable minimum levels differ from system to system, the approach is fairly consistent. EXAMPLES OF SERVICE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS HARTline The measures used in the route productivity analysis were drawn from HARTline's route performance measures and standards. An overall score (in terms of percentage of the system average) is calculated from the six measures utilized. A route that scores 50 percent or less overall should be recommended for elimination, especially if the score has remained under 50 percent over a period of time. HARTline also looks at the individual scores for each performance measure. A route that scores 50 percent or less on three or more indicators is recommended for a detailed analysis. The analysis is expected to include actions to improve rout e productivity. This is an intermediate step before discontinuation. In addition, a route with a final score between 50 and 99 percent is targeted for marketing, route analysis and schedule analysis. Thus HARTline examines belowCHAPTER 6: DEVELOPMENT OF SERVICE PERFORllfANCE STANDARDS
CHAPTER 6: DEVELOPMENT OF SERVICE PERFORMIINCE STIINDIIRD$ average routes (50 to 99 percent) more closely, analyzes routes failing (below 50 percent) at least three performance measures, and considers discontinuation of routes with a failing composite score (below 50 percent). PSTA PST A uses three performance measures to analyze its routes: passengers per hour; passengers per mile; and farebox recovery rate. All routes are expected to perform at a minimum of 75 percent of the system average. Taltran The City Commission of the City of Tallahassee formally adopted a policy, "Transit Action Planning Process and System Evaluation Criteria," in 1984, with sub sequent revisions. T he policy lists criteria for individual routes, the system as a whole, and new service areas. At the route level, performance indicators include operating ratio revenue per trip and revenue per mile. Specific minimum values (as opposed to percentages of the systemwide average) are cited in the policy: Operating ratio . . . . . . . . . 0.10 Revenue passengers per trip .......... 7.00 Revenue passengers per mile .... ..... 0.60 Each route must meet all of these criteria for continued operation. Tripper night and Sunday routes are required to meet only one of these criteria. Taltran also has a systemwide operating ratio requirement ofO .IO The policy specifies operation seven days a week, a span of service from 6:00a.m. to II :00 p.m. (although not for every route), bus stops at a minimum of every two blocks, bus benches at stops with 15 or more passengers per day use of 30-, 35-or 40-foot buses, and a minimum frequency of one bus per hour. PIIRT /:SHORT-TERM STRIITECJES
PENSACOLA URBANIZED AREA TRANSIT IMPROVEMENT STRATEGY Service expansion is based on the location of new traffic generators and/or meeting at least two of four criteria related to population density (at least three dwelling units or eleven persons per acre), vehicle availability (less than one vehicle available per dwelling unit), and minority population (at least one minority person per acre) within the service area. New routes must perform at 50 percent of the standard criteria by the end of the first year in order t o be continued CoTran Operating ratio and passengers per hour are the two performance measur e s used by CoT ran to e v a lu ate r oute productivity CoT ran calculates the ratio of a given route's performance to overall system performance for each measure. If a route is between 50 and 67 percent of the system a v erage on either measure the route is reviewed to identify potential modifications. If a route is below 50 percent of the system average on either measu r e its performance is unacceptable and it becomes a candidate for major change or elimination. MOTA MDT A h as prepared extensive guidelines for service p l anning, as befits the largest transit operator in the state Three guidelines are specifically related to service performance: passenger trips per revenue hour, net cost per passenger, and maximum load factors. If a route fails to meet any of the guidelines described below, then it is subject to further analy sis to improv e ridership or reduce service. Pa ss enger trips p e r revenu e hour is a measure used by many other transit systems MDT A spec i fies that the ratio of a route's passengers per hour to the systemwide average must be at least 50 percent. Net cost per passenger is calculated in the following manner : farebox revenue is s ubtracted from the rout e's direct operating cost, and the result is divided by the number of passenger hoardings on the route. The minimum performance guideline for MDT A routes is a net cost per passenger l ess than 2. 7 times the weighted system average, and is applied separately for w e ekdays and weekends Routes failing to meet this guideline are considered for significant service reduction. CHAPTER 6: DEVELOPMENT OF SERVICE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS
CHAPTER 6: DEVELOPMENT OF SERVICE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS Routes with a net cost per passenger greater than twice the system average arc subject to further analysis. The maximum load factor is the ratio o f the number of passengers to the number of available seats at the most crowded point on a route. Maximum load factor is typically averaged over a given time period. MDT A guidelines for Metro bus call for an average maximum load of 125 8 percent in the peak periods (i.e., 25 percent of all passengers on board are standing), II 0 percent du ring the midday period, and I 00 percent at other times Using a 40-seat bus as an examp le, this performance standard would call for 50 riders per trip during the peak periods 44 riders per trip in the midday, and 40 riders per trip at o ther times If average ridership exceeds these benchmarks, then service should be increased during the appropriate time period, and if ridership fe ll below the standards, service should be decreased. These three productivity indicators are the primary measures used to gauge route performance at MDT A. The guidelines document notes the existence of financial and capital constraints and special circumstances that may outweigh a strict application of these measures and stresses the importance of applying professional planning judgment for the proper use of these service planning guidelines. MOTA also has service planning guidelines addressing such aspects as service span frequency, route spacing and length, and route deviation, along with guidelines for new service. MOTA operates night or weekend service on a route if ridership is greater than I 0 passengers per hour in one direction. Weekend service is expected to meet performance guidelines listed above, but average passengers per hour on we ekends is used as the base for comparison. MDT A also considers leve ls of automobile ownership and night or weekend activity in the neighborhoods being served before decidi ng on span of service. The minimum frequency of service on a bus route is one bus every hour. Headway is a measure of the leng th of time between buses and the max im um corresponding headway is 60 minutes. Thi s is often called the "po licy headway," since this is the headway operated according to agency policy regard les s of demand. PART 1: SHORT-TERM STRATEGIES
PENSACOLA URBANIZED AREA TRANSIT IMPROVEMENT STRATEGY MDT A's route spacing guidelines are based on combined population and employment densities, and range from one-half mile to one and one-half miles between routes. Route length is limited to a three hoUI round-trip travel time. Route deviation, or the diverting of a bus wute from a major street to serve a specific traffic generator, is allowed under a complex formula involving the length of the deviation (in distance and time), the number of riders served, the number of riders inconvenienced, and the proportion of captive riders. Proposed new bus routes are expected to conform to the guidelines regarding service span and frequency, and to meet the passengers per revenue hour guideline within one year. Combined population and employment density along the new route corridor should be greater than 4,000 per square mile. It is in teresting to note that MTA-New York City Transit uses two-thirds of the system average for five indicators as the minimum standard for a specific route. The indicators used include operating ratio, deficit per passenger, variable (direct) cost per passenger, passengers per vehicle mile and passengers per revenue hour. Despite vast differences in the size of operation and obvious variations in systemwide averages, MT A-NYCT and the Florida systems take consistent approaches to service guidelines as a percentage of systemwide averages. SUMMARY OF SERVICE GUIDELINES Table 13 presents the performance indicators and service guidelines used by the five Florida systems reviewed for this report. CHAPTER 6: DEVELOPMENT OF SERVICE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS
CHAPTER 6: DEVELOPMENT OF SERVICE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS Table 13 Performance Indicators and Service Guidelines Indicator HARTline PSTA Taltran CoTran MDTk Operating Ratio 50% 75% 0.10 50% Revenue per Revenue Mile 50% Revenue per Revenue Hour 50% Riders per Revenue Mile 50% 75% 0.6 R i ders per Revenue Hour 50% 75% 50% 50% Riders per Trip 50% 7.0 Net Cost per Rider 270% 125% Peak Maximum Load Factor 110% Midday 100% Other Policy Headway 1 Hour 1 Hour New Service Criteria Yes Yes Note: Percentages in table refer to percentage of system average except for Maximum Load Factor which reflects the ratio of passengers to available seats. Taltran sets numerical m i nimums as noted APPLICATION OF SERVICE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS TO ECAT The use of percentages of systemwide averages makes service guidelines or performance standards useful for transit systems of any size. The two important issues are which performance indicators to use and how to define the minimum standard. Riders per revenue hour is the productivity measure most commonly used among the five systems, as shown in Tab l e 13. Operating ratio is also common as a cost-related indicator, although MOTA chooses to use net cost per rider. Two indicators included in the HARTline analysis and used in the route productivity evaluation, revenue per revenue mile and revenue per revenue hour, are not applied elsewhere ECA T could devise service performance standards based on two indicators (riders per revenue hour and operating ratio), four indicators (adding riders per revenue mile and riders per trip), or all six indicators (including the revenue measures). PART/: SHORT-TERM STRATEGIES
PENSACOLA URBANIZED ARJ:A TRANSIT IMPROVEMENT STRATEGY Nearly all transit systems that use service performance standards establish guidelines as a percentage of the system average. Fifty percent is most frequently used as a performance minimum among the systems examined, although some employ intermediate guidelines (below 67 percent or 100 percent, for examp l e) to flag potential problems on routes. CUTR recommends rhar ECAT adopr performance srandards calling for elimination or significanr service reduclions for any roure with a rota/ score le s s rhan 50 percent of rhe system average Also ECAT should analyze roures with a rota/ score between 50 and 66 percenr to identify ways to increase ridership or red u ce costs associated with these routes. Table 14 presents the results of applying the proposed service performance standards using FY 1994 data. Four routes are candidates for discontinuation ECAT has already discontinued Routes 8 and 17. Route 18, the Blue Angel Express is still establishing a market and will have no decision until the end of the three year trial period The importance of Route 18 is that it is a deliberate attempt to attract discretionary riders to the ECA T system through limited-stop service, a new (for Escarnbia County) service concept intended to make the trip by bus faster and mo r e direct, and through park-and-ride lots that increase ease of access to the bus system. The final route in this category, Route I, is a candidate for discontinuation. Only one route, Ro u te 1 2 i s flagged for further analysis (a score between 0.50 and 0.66). Note howeve r that two routes (Routes 3 and lOA) are close to this point, with scores of 0 67 E CAT may wish to examine boardings and alightings along th ese routes by time of day to determine whether service adjustment s may be warranted. Tbe other routes are performing acceptably. ECA T is already collecting data for the FT A Section 15 report on all of the ind i cators under cons i deration so there are no cost sav i ngs obtained by usi ng fewer indicators The six perforroance indicators provide a good balance among ridership, revenue, cost, and service provision measures. Thus, CUTR recommends that ECAT use all six performance indicators in the rou t e pr o ductivity analysis as the basis for developing service performance standards. CHAPTER 6: DEVELOPMENT OF SERVICE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS
CH,tPTER 6: DEVELOPMENT OF SERVICE PERFORMANC E STANDARDS Table 14 Application of Proposed ECAT Service P erformance Standards Route Score Routes Above System Average 16 Palafox/Downtown 2. 35 11 Myrtle Grove 1.38 5 Scenic Heights 1 .28 15 Navy Po i ni/Barrancas 1 2 7 7 Oakwood Terrace 1.23 2 Cordova MaiUP JC 1 19 13 9th Avenue/A rag on Co urt 1. 18 1 4 NAS/Navy Boulevard 1 .12 6 Alcan iz/ Oavis 1.04 Acceptable Routes 9 Un iversity Mall 0.82 4 T Streei/Palafox 0.80 10B Ensley 0.73 3 Bayv i ew 0.67 10 A Ensley 0.67 Routes Requ i ring Analysis 12 Saufley/George Sto n e 0.62 Candidates for Discontinuation 1 East Pensacola Heig h ts 0.49 8 UWF /EIIys on Pall( 0 28 17 Cantonment 0.26 18 Blue Ange l Express 0.24 Discont i nued PART[: SHORT-TERM STRATEGIES
PENSACOLA URBANIZED AREA TRANSIT IMPROVEMENT STRATEGY As noted earlier, service performance standards should not replace professional judgment and local experience. These standards provide an additional decision-making tool, one which is objective and readily understood. However, the standards should not be the sole means for determining whether continued operation of a route is warranted. One other factor to be taken into account is service area coverage. The adopted Pensacola!Escambia County Transit Development Plan contains a goal that 70 percent of the population in the service area be wirbin three-quarters of a mile of a bus route. Decisions on routes must be made with the service coverage goal in mind. For example, Route 12 is the sole transit service available for a large portion of the northwestern Pensacola urbanized area. If its performance were to deteriorate to the point at which the route became a candidate for discontinuation, ECA T could decide to put aside the service guidelines and continue to provide some service in order to maintain transit service to that area. Thus, ClffR recommends that service area coverage be considered along with route performance in any decision to discontinue or significantly reduce service on a particular route. Figure 41 shows the coverage area, defined as the area within one-quarter mile of a bus route, for the current ECA T route network. The population within the service area is II 0,232, or 41.9 percent of the Escambia County population of 262,798. All population figures are taken from the 1990 Census. With regard to other service-related guidelines, ECAT does not need to institute maximum load factors or new policy headways. ECA T has an unstated policy of allowing new routes to operate for the length of time that they are funded before making a decision on whether to retain the new route as a permanent part of its service network. Exceptions are made for new routes that are clearly not close to meeting expectations. This is a sound approach, and should be continued. In the future, it may be appropriate to re-examine the issue of criteria for new service and to adopt guidelines similar to Taltran's standards for new routes. CHAPTER 6: DEVELOPMENT OF SERVICE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS
Fig u re 4 1 Escambia Population within 1/4 Mile of the ECAT Network 199 2 C ensu s Tract Bo ood a rie s Popula tion w ithi n Sevice AN!a (110 232 )
PENSACOLA URBANIZIJI) AREA TRANSIT I MPROVEMENT STRATEGY ECAT prepares a monthly spreadsheet that includes all of the input variables used in calculating the productivity evaluation measures. Thus, it i s poss ible to update the performance standards analysis every month and track the performance of a rou t e flagged for further analysis or discontinuation. Realistically however, an annual systemwi de analysis is preferable, since most routes do not n eed to be examined every month and there ma y be a problem with seasonal varia t ion in r i dershi p when using m o n thly data. Because the performance standards are based on data that are already being collected there are no new data collec t ion activities required t o implement the guide lin es. CUTR does recommend t hat CAT conduct on board ridechecks periodically on routes that do not peiform well, as part of the additional analysis suggested for such routes. APPLICATION TO GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND STANDARDS I N LONG-RANGE l'LAN S These recommendations are useful not only in the application of service standards but also in the development of goals, objectives and standards for the long range plan update For example, under a general goal of m aki ng efficient transit service available to co u n t y residents who desire to use transit, objective s could address providing e ffic ient service, adopting serv ic e performance s t andards, ensuring access to the system by county and monitoring transit usage. The recommended standards would be that each route score at least 50 per cent of t he system averag e on th e adopted performance stan dar ds, tha t routes between 50 and 66 percent be analyzed in d e t ail to identify potentia l i mprovements that 40 percent of the c ounty population be within one quarter mile of the transit network and that ECA T periodically monitor those rou tes that do not perform well by means of on-board rid echecks. T he inclusion of transit-specific goals, objectives and standards would conform to the intent of ISTEA It would also provide a connection between the lo ng-term transportation plan and the s h ort-term p lan for th e transit sys te m : ; R 6: DEl :'NT OF StIll 1< ,. PE:RFOI< TANDARI)S
CHAPTER 7: PROPOSED ECAT SERVICE PLAN Chapter 7 PROPOSED ECAT SERVICE PLAN This chapter develops specific short-tenn route and service recommendations for the county's transit system. These suggested improvements are drawn in large measure from analyses in previous reports, specifically the route perfonnance evalua tion an d development of service guidelines. The first section presents the results of a census-tract-level analysis of the propensity to use transit. Census data regarding the elderly population, low-income households and zero-vehicle households are used to define the areas where the greatest need for transit service exists. These areas are shown in relationship to the existing route network. Projected population and employment figures for the year 2000, developed as part of the Pensacola Urbanized Area Transportation System (PUATS) plan update, are discussed in the second section. Particular attention is given to the implications of near-tenn growth trends on the transit system. The third section contains proposed route and service improvements. New route profiles intended to use ECA T' s resources more efficiently are developed This section fonns the heart of the operational plan for ECAT. The fourth section of this chapter projects the cost increases and savings associated with each of the recommendations, and estimates impacts on ridership. Current funding mechanisms for ECA T are summarized and alternate funding options are reviewed in the fifth section. T he fmal section summarizes inter-county arrangements for providing transit services elsewhere in Florida. CENSUS TRACT ANALYSIS Census tract data from the 1990 Census can be used to compare demographic infonnation particularly those characteristics that are highly correlated with a person's or h ouseho ld's need for transit with the county's existing transit network configuration. This type of analysis is PART/: SHORT-TERN STRATEGIES
PENSACOLA URBANIZED ARA TRANSIT IMPROVEMENT STRATEGY useful for determining whether areas with concentrations of transit-dependent households are adequately served by the existing transit network. For this analysis, the demographic characteristics used to indicate transit dependence included the distribution of eldedy (60 years or older) persons, low-income (less than $10,000 annual household income) households, and zero vehicle-ownership households. The first step in identifying the census tracts that have persons or households with the greatest propensity for transit use involved the calculation of the percent distributions of the three demographic characteristics for each tract. This process resulted in a table of values indicating the percent of elderly persons, low-income households, and zero-vehicle households for each of Escambia County's 52 census tracts. The census tracts were then sorted for each characteristic in descending order of percent distribution so that the tracts with higher percentages for each characteristic would appear at the top of their respective ranges. From the percentage ranges, an average percent value and a standard deviation value were calculated for each characteristic. Statistically, the standard deviation may be thought of as a measure of distance from the average value. According to an empirical rule of thumb for most moderately-sized data sets, approximately 68 percent of the data values lie within one standard deviation of the average and approximately 95 percent of the data values lie within two standard deviations. Thus, the census tracts can be sorted into one of the following four categories for each characteristic: below average, above average but below one standard deviation (average), between one and two standard deviations above average (above average), and more than two standard deviations above average (far above average). The next step involved the assignment of discrete numerical scores to each of the four categories established for each demographic characteristic. These scores serve two basic purposes: to provide uniform ranking to all of the tracts within a particular category and to numerically differentiate among the four categories for each characteristic. A comparative probability estimation method was utilized to develop the scores. First the probability that a tract would be part of a specific category for a given characteristic was calculated for each category. For example, only three of the Escambia County's 52 census tracts, were part of the "far above average" category for the zero-vehicle-ownership characteristic. This means that there was a 5.77 percent probability (number of tracts in category I number of total tracts x I 00 percent) that any CHAPTER 7: PROPOSED ECAT SERVICE PLAN
CHAPTER 7: PROPOSED ECAT SERVICE PLAN given tract would fall within the range established for that particular category for the zero vehicle-ownership characteristic. After the probabilities were calculated for each characteristic's categories they were then used to estimate the categories' scores via comparative probability ratios That is, the probability percentage for each category was divided into the probability percentage for the "below average" category. This numerator was selected so that, for each characteristic, the census tracts in the "below average" category would receive a score of one (I). Again using the "far above average" category of the zero-vehicle-ownership characteristic as an example, it was determ ined that the score for this category would be 11. 0, since the probability for the "below average" category was 63.46 percent and this probability divided by the "far above average" category probability of 5. 77 percent equals 11.0. The percentage and the score of each demographic characteristic's categories are presented in tabular form in Appendix E. Finally, compos ite scores were calculated for the census tracts by summmg the ind ividual category scores that they had received for each demographic characteristic. The census tracts were then ranked by composite score and stratified into four levels using the same method that was utilized to develop characteristic categories. The census tracts that fell into the "far above average" category were defined as primary transit-dependent tracts, i.e., census tracts with the greatest propensity for transit based on the tracts's percentages of elderly persons, low -i ncome households, and zero-vehicle households. Secondary transit-dependent tracts inc l uded those that fell into the "above average" category; tertiary transit-dependent tracts included those tracts in the "average" category. Figure 42 illustra tes the primary, secondary, and tertiary transit-dependent census tract s with an overlay of Escambia County's bus route network. As the figure indicates all primary and secondary tracts are currently well-served by the ECA T route network. This suggests that ECAT is providing service in transit-dependent neighborhoods, where it is most needed. The currently adopted transit development plan also identifies transit-dependent census tracts For t he TOP, income and vehicle ownership were the only variables used to determine transit depende ncy and a statistically -b ased scoring system was not empl oyed. It is instructive to compare the results of the two analyses. Table 15 presents thi s comparison. One of the three PART[: SHORT-TERM STRATEGIES
PENSACOLA URBANIZED AREA TRANSIT IMPROVEMENT STRATEGY tracts shown in Figure 42 as a primary transit-dependent tract was also rated as primary in the TDP; this is Tract 4. Tracts 2 and 17, the other primary tracts here, were listed as secondary tracts in the previous study. The two secondary tracts in this study (Tracts 6 and 7) were primary tracts in the TOP. The highest-rated tertiary tract (Tract 15) was previously rated as primary, while Tracts 16 and 40 were included among the secondary tracts. Of the eight tracts identified in the TDP, only one (Tract 16) was not ranked among the top eight transit-dependent tracts by this method. Table 15 Transit-Dependent Trads Identified in this Analysis and in the Eseambia County Transit Development Plan Census Tract Cumonl Rating Rating In TOP 2 Primary Secondary 4 Primary PrimaJY 17 Primary Secondary 6 Secondary Primary 7 Secondary Primary 15 Tertiary Primary 40 Tertiary Secondary 19 Tertiary 14.01 Tertiary -16 Tertiary Secondary 8 Tertiary -3 Tertiary -13 Tertiary -18 Tertiary 20 Tertiary -22 Tertiary -37 Tertiary -5 Tertiary CHAPTER 7: PROPOSED ECAT SERVICE PLAN
Figure 42 ECAT Transit Network and Transit
PENSACOLA URBANIZED AREA TRANSIT IMPROVEMENT STRATEGY The statistical analysis presented in this section provides a mathematical definition (related to the average and the standard deviation of the total score) of primary secondary and tertiary tracts, and thus is more objective than categorizations based on arbitrary cutoff points. The results of these two approaches are very sim ilar providing additional confidence that the identified tracts are indeed the areas with the greatest propensity to use transit. POPULATION AND EMPLOYMENT TRENDS Projections at the traffic analysis zone (T AZ) level for the year 2000 by the study team conducting the PUATS plan update have been reviewed with regard to potential effects on the eXcisting transit syst em. Like most places, the Pensacola urbanized area is experiencing growth in existing and developing suburban neighborhoods in outlying portions of the urbanized area. T hese trends arc a continuation of the "urban sprawl" development, which results in land use patterns that are difficult to serve by a fixed route transit system. This analysis examines changes in population and employment, and groups T AZs that are within the current transit ser v ice area and outside the current service area in order to obtain a qua l itative sense of effects on the transit system. For example, projected population gr0\\1h between 1992 and 2000 i s greatest in T AZs outside the transit service area. As seen in Table 16, population is projected to increase by 12.3 percent for the urbanized area, but the projected i ncrease is 20.8 percent outside the existing service area and only 5.8 percent within the existing service area. The seven TAZs with population increases of at least 800 persons are all in Santa Rosa County. Within the service area, the largest population increases are expected in TAZs to the west, especially near Corry Field, and near the airport. In terms of percentage increases, the three T AZs with over 75-percent increases i n population are all within the service area, near the Pensaco la Airport o r Corry Field. However, 39 of the 47 T AZs w ith projected increa ses of at least 25 percent are outside the service area, and only eight are wi thin the service area. IPTER 7: PROPOS/ill ECit 1' SERVICE I"
CHAPTER 7: PROPOSED ECAT SERVICE PLAN Table 16 Projected Percentage Increases in Population, 1992-2000 Populall
PENSACOLA URBANIZED AR&I TRANSIT IMPROVEMENT STRATEGY Table 17 Projected Percentage Inereases in Employment 1992-2000 lndu.trial ...;; ... Area QJmmen:ia( Service TOtal EmiiloYmint EmployJn&nt Employment Emplilymerit Pensacola Urbanized Area -14.0% 11.9% 19 1% 12.9% within ECA T Service Area .3% 8.5% 19.0% 12.1% outs ide ECA T Service Area -1. 7% 26.3% 20.2% 15.4% Source: PUATS Plan Update Data T he T AZ w i th the highest number of projected new jobs (nearly 4,000) encompasses the Naval Air Station (NAS). This is a greater increase than is forecast for the entire portion outside ECA T's service area. All six T AZs forecast to add at least 300 employees are within ECA T's service area, including locat i ons near the 1-10/1110 junction, in the area of Ninth Avenue and Brent Lane, and in downtown west of Spring Street In percentage terms four of the six T AZs expected to double the number of jobs arc withi n the service area, including areas north of the airport, along Dav i s H i ghway l!Jld along Airport Boulevard west of Ninth Avenue. The major employment increases expected at NAS argue for the continuation of the Blue Angel Express (Route 18) As this route becomes established, it can be expected to provide transportation for some portion of the new jobs at NAS. Its operation as a limited stop route makes it more competitive with the automobile than most transit routes. Ridership on Route 18 has been increas i ng gradually, and it should continue in operation in anticipation of the new jobs expected at NAS as long as this ridership trend continues. Th e employm e nt picture for the year 2000 is more favorable to ECAT than the population pr o jections. ECAT's current service area is projected to contain over three-quarters of all jobs w i thin the Pensacola urbanized area in the year 2000. CHAPTI:.' R 7: PROPOSED ECAT SERVICE PLAN
CIIAPTER 7: PROPOSED ECAT SERVICE PLAN SI'F..CIFJC ROUTE RECOMMENDATIONS CUTR makes the following recommendations based on the route productivity analysis, proposed se rvice guidelines, and th e estimation of demand for transit service. Cost and revenue estimates are mentioned in the text, and are documented in the following section. I. Restructure Routes 1 and 3. These routes currently operate in oppos ite directions along the same route through East Hill and East Pensacola Heights. Route I is the weak est local route curr ently operated by ECAT, whil e Route 3's performance is only slightly better. Major problems include circuitous routing, lack of direct service to a central destination for most riders, and lack of a direct connection to downtown. The routes should be split, with Route I serving the area we st of the bayou and Route 3 connecting Cordova Mall with downtown via Bayou Boulevard and Cervantes Street. As shown in F igure 43 Route I would travel east from the Transfer Center on Fairfield and Texar Drives and south on 12th Avenue. The rou t e would be streamlined through the East Hill area, traveling east on Cross Street and sou th on 17th Avenue to Cervantes Street. The revised Route I would follow Cervantes and Palafox Str e ets to Governmen t Street downtown, turn around via Government and Baylen Streets and retrace its route in the opposite direction. The advantages of this routing are that it is more direct and provides a connection between East Hill and downtown. The primary disadvantage is that there will no longer be bus service along 12th Avenue south of Cross Street. but the Da v is/Aicaniz, N inth Avenue and 12th A venue corridors are too close to justify service on each The use of 17th A venue for the r ev i sed Route I will provide better spac ing for routes connecting the Transfer Center and downtown east ofl-110. Route 3 would follow its current routing from Cordova Mall through Pensacola Junior College and Eas t Pensacola Heights to Cervantes Street. The proposed routing would take Route 3 west on Cervantes Street, south on Palafox Street. west on Government Street and n orth on A Street via the current Route 15 path to the T ran sfer Ce nter. T h e return trip would op e rate along the same path, excep t for traveling north from Ciovcrnrnent Str eet to C ervantes Street via Baylen Street and returning directly to Cordova Mall via Oayou Boulevard figure 44 shows the proposed Route 3. This routing provide s several benefits. p f}RTTERM S1 :s
Figu re 43 Proposed R oute 1 -0 z z ,... ., z z en 1!!. 0 %-s: j( "' !a !a z m Current Route --Proposed Route
Figure 44 Proposed Route 3 + z -o z z !!!. 0 !!!. jl. .. ., '!J P: .. 0> [ z Current Route --Proposed Route St
PENSACOLA URBANIZED AREA TRANSIT IMPROVEMENT STRATEGY East Pensacola Heights residents have direct service to Cordova Mall and downtown, while being able to tra nsfer at the mall or the Transfer Center to other routes. There would be a direct connection between Cordova M all and downtown ; currently, this trip can only be m ad e w ith a transfer. By operatin g along the curren t routing for Route 15 between downtown and the transfer center the revised Route 3 would provide addi tio nal s ervice essenti ally increasing th e frequency along the most-traveled portion of Route 15 to tw o bus es per hour in each direction instead of the curren t one bus per hour. Route 15 was recommended as a candidate for increased service based on its performance; the revised Route 3 would p r ovide this service at no additional cost. A disadvantage of this proposal is that the re would no longer be service between 9th Avenue and Bayou Bou levard a l ong Fairfield Drive and 12th Aven u e I f this proves to be a p r ob le m. it may be possible to re-route Route 2 or Routes 5 and 9 along 12th Avenue .It is assumed that the schedules for Routes I and 3 would remain unc han ged. Route I has a round trip time of 55 min u tes, and generally leaves th e Transfer Center eve r y two hours on the hal f ho ur th roug hou t mo s t of the day. Route 3 has a round trip t ime of one hour and 25 min u tes and leaves the Transfer Center every h our on the hour. Since Rou t e 15 leaves on the half hour, Rou tes 3 and 1 5 combined would provide servi c e every 30 minutes betw een the Transfer Center and down town via the c urr ent Route I 5 path. The revisions will reduce revenue miles on the two routes by almost 20 000 ann ually, or 22 percent. No c han ges in rev en ue hours are expected. I t is con servatively anticipated that more direc t routi ng s and service to dow ntow n on the two routes will i nc rease riders h ip by 5 perce nt or appro x imat el y 3 000 annually. The revisions result in a net positive chang e of $21, 000 ann u ally. The revised routes shou ld be evaluated us ing the proposed ser vice guidelines at six months and at one year after implemen ta tio n. If r ou te performance has not improved to meet the guidelines, then ECA T should discontinue Route I and return Route 3 to its curren t r outing at a two-hour headway. CHAP1.R 7: P h, :oseo 1.: SERVIC/0 /'1.. t.V
CHAPHIR 7: PROPOSED ECAT SERVICE PLAN 2. Straighten Route 13 along Ninth A\ enue. Route 13 currently deviates from its path along Nir1th A v enue to serve 12th Avenue in the vicinity of Cervantes Street. Now that Routes I and 3 will pass 12th Avenue along Cervantes Street on their way to and from downtown. the Route 13 deviation can be eliminated (Figure 45). T his will result in faster service along 9th Avenue. Revenue miles on Route 13 will be slightly reduced result i ng in a savings of approximately $4, 000 annually. No changes in revenue hours or in ridership are assumed 3. Restore midday service on Route 2. Route 2 is the most direct route connecting the Transfer Center with Cordova Mall, PJC, Sacred Heart Hospital and the Pensacola Regional Airport. With the restructuring of Routes I and 3, there will be a decrease in cormecting service Thus, CUTR recommends that hourly service be pr o vided on Route 2 throughout the day, adding two trips in the midday period This change will add slightly over 500 revenue hours annually. It is anticipated that Route 2 will absorb some riders currently using Routes I and 3 as well as generate additional riders from its midday ser v ice, resulting in a 12-perccnt increase in ridership and revenue. The net result is an annual increase in cost of slightly under $19,000. 4. Adjust the Route 6 schedule. Routes 6 and 13 both serve downtown via corridors on l y a few blocks apart Route 6 a l ong Davis/Aicaniz Streets and Route 13 along N inth Avenue. Bot h routes currently depart from the transfer center on the ha l f hour. C UT R recommends that the Route 6 schedule be changed so that it departs on the hour. This will increase the flequency of service in the neighborhoods served by both routes to one bus every 30 m i nutes, although the passenger will have to know wh. ich street to wait on at a particular time. This alternative is preferred over the option of combining both routes on a single street, because it does not force anyone to walk farther to reach a bus stop. PAFI 'OFIT-Tefl <:. rrecur s
F igure 4 5 Proposed Route 13 z z ,... -o (/) -!1. z 92 92 z m (/) -st Current Route --Proposed Route
CIIAPTER 7: PROPOSED ECAT SERVICE PLAN Although this appears to be a relatively minor change that improves service freq u e ncy and avoids unnecessary duplication of service, ECA T encountered opposition when it implemented this schedule change and so returned to the current schedule. There are more routes leaving the transfer center on the half hour than on the hour, and passengers resisted the idea of having to wait 30 minutes to transfer in some instances. This proposal nevertheless is a cost free means to increase service frequency to the entire area, and so is worth pursuing. The alt erna tive of combining both routes in a single corridor ei ther Alcani?!Davis S t reets or Ninth Str eet, remains an opt i on for ECA T. This revis i on does not affect revenue miles or revenue hours. It is assumed that the increased freq u ency of service in the Davis/Alcaniz Streets and Nint h Avenue corridors will result in a 10 percent ridership increase on both routes resulting in a revenue gain of more than $7,000 annually 5. turnaround path for Route 6 in downtown. Routes 6 and 13 loop in oppos ite directions via Government, E and Garden Streets. There are few major trip attractors west of the Pensacola City Hall in downtown, so CUTR recommends that Route 6 be streamlined by turning south on Spring Street (which separates the Escambia County Judicial Center from City Hall), in stead of traveling all the way to E Street. Route 13 i s not included in this recommendation s o that it can continue to provide service from downtown to the Social Security office at Garden and D Streets The area will continue t o be served by Route 15 along Government Street between E and S pring Streets and along Garden Street between A and Spring Streets. F igure 46 shows proposed revisions to Route 6 This change will reduce revenue miles while not affecting revenue hours nor ridership The resulting decrease in cost is estimated at $6,000 annually In addition the shortened path should reduce the number of empty buses traveling through the area west of Spring Street, thus helping to impro ve ECA T's publ ic image PART . '()RT-TEIPI
z r (/) -z m Fi gure 46 Proposed Route 6 Alcaniz/Davis Current Route --Proposed Route
CHAPTER 7: PROPOSED ECAT SERVICE PlAN 6. Increase frequency of service on Route 11. Route II h as the second highest performance score of all routes in the ECAT system and serves an area with a high residential density and a large transit-dependent population. CUTR recommends that service be provided every 30 minutes on weekdays as a demonstration project, and that ECA T apply for Service Development funds from FOOT to support this demonstration. The project should be evaluated after six and 12 months, w ith a decision on whether to continue this level of service after 12 months. This revision would add 12 round trips each weekday, adding over 3,000 revenue hours of service annually. Ridership and revenue are estimated to incre ase by 50 percent with a doubling of service. The net annual cost of this revision is $105,000 7 Institute evening service. This was a recommendation contai ned in the 1992 Transit Development Plan which noted that seven of the eleven peer systems operated until at least I 0:00 p.m. Evening service is the sing l e most requested improvement, accordi ng to ECA T's Marketing Department. Some transit systems have established late-even ing loops, combinations of existing routes that serve most but not all areas served during the day Others selectively operate certain routes in the evening. The latter approach is recommended for ECAT. Figure 47 presents the proposed evening service network Recommended routes include: PAR1 Route 5, between the transfer center and the CordovafPJC/Sacred Heart complex only; Route 9 along Davis Highway only, terminating at West Florida Hospital and also serving University Mall; Route II, serving Brownsville, Myrtle Grove and West Pensacola; Route 13, serving Ninth Avenue, Seville Square and downtown; Route 14/15 combined, serving the Baptist Hospital, Barrancas Avenue and Garden Street. The combined route would travel south from the transfer center via Route IS to Garden Street, th en follow Route 14 to Barrancas Avenue. The return route is via Route 1 5 but bypassing its downtow n loop. If warranted, an extension of evening service to NAS via Navy Boulevard is an alternative. 'fiRT-TERM S :/(f.$
Figure 47 Escambia County Area Transit Routes Service
CHAPTER 7: PROPOSED ECAT SERVICE PLAN Most portions of the service area are covered with this evening network. A round trip should take one hour and all routes should leave the transfer center at the same time to facilitate transfers. The last trip should return to the transfer center by I 0:00 p.m. These routes have been selected based on their productivity rankings, the evening service coverage, and Saturday ridership. The most productive routes in the ECA T system Route 16, is not included because its Saturday ridership is lower than its weekday ridership and because Route 13 can provide service to the downtown area. Providing evening service requires that ECA T make complementary ADA service available for anyone within three-quarters of a mile of the evening route network. This is a potentially significant cost. In administrative terms, later service also requires the presence of a dispatcher at the transfer center. ECAT's maintenance facility currently operates through midnight, so no additional costs are i ncurred for maintenance personnel by evening service Evening service would require an additional 16 revenue hours daily on the five routes, or an annual increase in revenue hours of over 4 ,0 00. Ridership and revenue during evening service is estimated at I 0 percent of current daily totals on the routes involved, based on experience at other systems operating evening service. The net result is a cost increase of nearly $1 50,000 annually 8. Split Routes 5 and 9 into separate routes. This recommendation would give each route its own identity and purpose with Route 5 serving Davis Highway and Route 9 serving Ninth Avenue. The northern t e rminus for both routes would be West Florida HospitaL The routes meet there at five minutes before the hour on their current schedules, so no changes would be required in terms of departure times. Both routes have a round trip tim e of 90 minutes; the revised Route 5 would make a round trip in 60 minutes, while the revised Route 9 would take two hours. No change in revenue miles or revenue hours is anticipated, nor is any ridership change assumed. There is no net cost associated with this revision. PART/: SHORT-TERM STRATEGIES
PENSACOLA URBANIZED AR TRANSIT IMPROV EMENT STRATEGY ECA T proposed splitting the routes several years ago and met with community opposition from riders along Ninth Avenue who wanted direct access to University Mall. A timed transfer at West Florida Hospital would not be a serious inconvenience. If the routes are separate, it is much easier to judge the productivity of each and make appropriate change s in service and frequency. The split in routes might open the way for a future extension of Route 9 to serve the U niversity of West Florida on a fuJI-time basis. 9. Restructure Route 12. Th i s route serves the George Stone Vocational T echnical Center in the northwestern portion of the urbanized area. The original decisio n to locate George Stone in an area far from existing transit routes (Route 12 was started specifically to serve George Stone) is an example of poor coordination between planning and transit. Route 12 i s the second-worst local route in terms of productivity. Part of its problem is that it has a sizable mid route loop between Michigan Avenue and Fairfield Drive where it operates northbound via Mobile Highway and southbound via Muldoon Road and Patricia Street. A mid-route loop discourages ridership since a person can only get on or off the bus in one direction along the loop. ECA T reports greater usage along the northern part of the route, so CUTR recommends that the southbound Route 12 be rerouted via Cerny Road Marlane Drive and Mobile Highway (Figure 48). This rerouting would reduce the size of the mid-route loop considerably while continuing to serve res idents most likely to use transit. This proposal would reduce revenue miles slightly, resulting in a net annual decrease in cost of $1 000. No changes are anticipated to revenue hours or to ridership. A longer-term approach to the issue of serving George Stone is to make it the western terminus of a crosstown route via Michigan Avenue and Brent Lane to Cordova MaiVPJC. ECA T has received requests for a crosstown route and for service along Michigan Avenue. Such a route would increase service area coverage by filling in gaps, and would provide a direct link between the western section of the urbanized area and a major activity center (Figure 49). However there are several disadvantages to this long-term proposal: CHAPTER 7: PROPOSED CAT SERVICE PLAN
Figure 48 Proposed Route 12 Dr Falrlield Dr --Current Route -Proposed R oute z i St z r !!}
This is a blank page
2 ::J 0 0::: c: 1/) e (.) "'0 Q) 1/) 0 Q. e a.. WymaftRoad Pine Forest Road + NL Communlly Or
PENSACOl-A UHBANI:tEO AREA TRANSIT ]MPHOVEMffNT STRATEGY a new crosstown route would be expensive, even if half of its costs were covered by Service Development funds; estimated ridership is not high (possibly ten riders per round trip, similar to Ro u te 12 currently); Michigan Avenue is a five -l ane, relatively h igh-speed road with few traffic signals, making it difficult and dangerous for passengers to get to or from bus stops With an es t imated 12 daily round trips and 13 total vehicle hours ( including deadhead to and from the garage), the crosstown route would have an annual cost of $143,000. Annual ridership would be approx i mately 30,000, with an annual revenue of$19,000 The net cost of this route would be approximately $ 124, 000 annually. COST AND RID ERSHIP ESTIMATES Throughout the previous section, estimates of cost and ridership changes have been cited. This section describes the met hods u sed to ca l cu l ate thes e changes Table 18 presents changes in revenue miles and revenue hours as a resu lt of the pwposals Because labor costs are such a large portion of overall system costs, the average cost per to t a l hour ($43.23) is used in cases where there are changes in revenue hours. No t e that usc of this average cost will overstate the actual costs invol v ed because many of the factors contributing t o average cost (such as administrative functions and overhead) are not affected by the proposed changes. In terms of arriving at a ballpark figure for costs, however, this procedure is accepta()le For proposa l s where there are changes in r evenue miles only, an es t imated unit cost of$1.00 per re ve nue mile is used. This estimate includes the cost of diesel fuel, m a intenance and wear and t ear on the vehic les. Ridership and revenue increases are est imated based o n the ex t ent of change s to a route, standard service elasticities (adjusted for spec i fic circumstances) and professiona l judgment concerning the impact of specific changes on ridership. For the Routes I and 3 restructuring, it is assumed that ridership will increase by five percent as a result of streamlining the routes and serving downtown, ev e n though actual vehi cl e miles of service will decrease For Route 2, a 20-percent I ECAT S1 I'LAl'l
CHAPTER 7: PROPOSED ECAT SERVICE PLAN increase in service is expected to resu lt in a 12-percent increase in ridership, based on a standard service elasticity of + 0 .6. For the Route 6 schedule adjustment head ways will be lowered to 30 minutes in the areas served by Routes 6 and 13 but frequency of service will remain stable at two buses per hour, so a I 0 percent ridership increase on each route is forecast. Doubling service on Route II is estimated to increase ridership by 50 percent because the standard service elasticity can not always be applied in cases of large service changes. Finally, evening service is anticipated to attract I 0 percent of current daily ridership on the affected routes (Routes 14 and 15 are averaged) in accordance with experience at other systems with evening service. These percentage changes are applied to both ridership and revenue totals i.e ., the average fare paid by current riders is assumed to remain unchanged. Table 18 Estimated Change in Service Levels Ass
PENSACOLA URBANIZED AREA TRANSIT IMPROVEMENT STRATEGY Table 19 shows changes in annual operating costs and in revenue, and calculates the net fiscal impact for each proposed revision. Total changes in costs and revenue for all proposals combined are also presented. The net fiscal impact of all changes is -$232,000 but note that the costs of the two most expensive changes (increased frequency on Route II and evening service) are responsible for this sum; without these two proposals, net impact would be positive Table 19 Cost and Revenue Impacts or Recommendations Increase/ Net Action (Decrease} Annual Aseal In Annual Revenue Impact Operating Cost 1 Restructure Routes 1 and 3 ($19,374) +$1,715 $21,089 2. Straighten Route 13 along Ninth Avenue ($3,915) No Change $3, 915 3. Restore midday service on Route 2 $22,047 +$3,099 ($18,948) 4. Adjust the Route 6 schedule No Change +$7,698 $7,000 5. Shorten the t urnaround path for Route 6 ($6,330) No Change $12,203 6. Increase frequency of service on $132,284 +$27,300 ($104,984) Route 11 7 I ns titute evening service $176,378 +$27,899 ($148,479) 8. Split Routes 5 and 9 into separate routes No Change No Change so 9. Restructure Route 12 ($1,020) No Change ($1,020) Total $300,070 +$67.712 ($232,358) ECAT'S FUNDING STRUCTURE ECAT's funding structure includes federal, state, and local sources. For fiscal year 1995, federal funding includes Section 9 funds, while state funding includes Florida Department of Transportation (FOOT) operating assistance and FOOT urban corridor funds. In addition to revenue generated by the transit system (which includes passenger fare revenues, special tran si t fares, auxiliary transportation funds, and other non-transportat ion funds), at the local level Escambia County and the City of Pensa cola also provide funding Currently Escarnbia County CHAPTER 7: PROPOSED ECAT SERVICE PLAN
CHAPTER 7: PROPOSEIJ ECAT SERVICE PLAN does not have any funds dedicated to transit at their source. The total operating budget for fiscal year 1995 is $4,483,403. Tab le 20 shows the breakdown ofECAT's budgeted operating funding sources for FY 1995. Capital grants that have been requested for FY 1995 from federal and state sources, as well as the county, are listed in Table 21. Table 20 ECAT Budgeted Sources of Operating Funding (FY 1995) Funding Type Percent of Total Funding Federal Funds Section 9 22% Planning Reimbursement 2% State Funds FOOT Operating Assistance 14% FOOT Urban Corridor 4% Loea l Funds Directly Generated Funds 29% City of Pensacola 14% Escambia County 15% Source: ECAT Table 21 ECA T Requested Capital Grants (FY 1995) Items Dollar Amount New Buses $1 100 000 Capital Maintenance Parts $75,000 Maintena nce Equipment $20 000 Office Equipment $5, 000 Two Service Vehicles $36.000 Bus Stop Signs and Poles $5,000 Sprinkler System for Building $43,000 Facility Repair $20,000 Source: ECAT PART 1: SHORT-TE!tlf STRATEGIES
PENSACOLA URBANIZED ARE-I TRANSIT IMPROVEMENT STRATEGY Available Transit Assistance Funding Sou rces This section describes cUITent sources of trllm-portation funding for systems operating in Florida. The sources of the three types of funding : federal, state, and local, are listed and briefly discussed. The presented information is from the Florida FiveYear Statewide Transil Developmem Concepts prepared by CUTR. Also illustrated are tax revenue scenarios for possible sources of additional funding for transit. Federal Funding Sources Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) Trust Fund. Mass Transit Account Currently, one cent of the 18. 4 cents per gallon federal gas tax is distributed to the states through formulas and discretionary apportions. Beginning October I 1995, 0.5 cents will be allocated directly to local governments. These funds are used for capital expansions of local government transit systems lntermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act OSTEA> of 1991, Flexible Funds-The six-year total available funding (through 1997) is more than $155 billion, with $31.5 billion being allocated directly to transit through the Federal Transit Administration (FT A). Of this amount, $18 2 billion is from FHWA's Mass Transit Account, and the remainder is appropriations from the general fund. Also, flexible funds are available through FHW A that augment typical FT A grants. These funds (which amount to almost $70 billion over the six-year time period) are in addition to the $31.5 billion specified for public transit, and are a part of Title I, Surface Transportation Program (STP). STP purposes include non-operating assistance programs eligible under the Federal Transit Act. In 1992 total flexible funds allocated to areas in Florida with populations greater than 200,000 (including Pensacola!Escambia County) amounted to $98,715,255 Stare Funding Sources Stat e Transportation Trust Fund CSTTF) The two major contributors to this fund are state fuel sales tax revenue (of which about 90 percent goes to the STTF), and the State Comprehensive Enhanced Transportation System (SCETS) tax Other sources include Florida's fuel use tax aviation fuel tax, vehicle licensing fees, initial auto registration fees, and rental car surcharges. CHAPTER 7: PROPOSED ECAT SERVICE PLAN
CHAPTER 7: PROPOSED ECAT SERVICE PLA.tv Through the year 2000, 14.3 percent of all revenues distributed to the STTF are to be dedicated annually by FOOT for public transit and capital rail projects. Between five and seven percent is committed to surface passenger transit (this amount increases to IS percent in 200 I). From the STTF, block grants are issued to the state's transit operators pursuant to Florida Statute 341.053. All Section 9 providers receive $20,000 or an amount equal to the leve l of local tax revenue secured by the provider, whichever is less. The remainder of the funds allocated to block grants are disbursed to all eligible Section 9 and Se c tion 18 providers according to a distribution formula. Block grants can be used for costs associated wit h public bus transit and local public fixed guideway capital projects, with public bus transit service development and transit corridor projects, and with public bus transit operations. Additionally, I S percent of b l ock grant funds are transferred to the Transportation-Disadvantaged (TO) Trust Fund. Table 22 indicates a schedule for the distribution of block grant funds to ECAT over the next five years. Tabl e 22 F D O T Schedul e for Dis trib uti o n o f B lock Grant Fund s (Ba se d o n 19 9 0 Popu lation R eve nu e Mi l es, and P assenger Trips) 1 994195 1995196 1 996/9 7 1997/98 Escambia County Area Trans i t $546,417 $583 559 $588,536 $591 ,210 S o urce: Florida FiveYear Statewide Transit Development Concepts 1998/99 $594,268 One-Cent Gas Tax RevenuesRevenue from a one-cent gas tax i s an additional source of trans i t funding. Based on historical and forecast gasoli n e cons u mption, projec t ions of revenue from such a tax were calculated for each county in Florida Forecast revenue for the years 1994 through 1999 are illustrated in Table 23. State Sales Tax Revenues This is another potential source of public transportation funding. Revenue from a one-cent per dollar sales tax was pro jected for the years 1994 through 1999 for all of Florida's counties. These forecasts were derived from data on taxable sales and sales tax collections from the Flor ida Department o f Revenue. The estimates are shown in Table 23. PART 1: SHORT-TERM STRATEGIES
PENSACOLA URBANIZED AREA TRANSIT IMPROVEMENT STRATEGY Table 23 Forecast of Tax Revenues for Escambia County (in thousands) ' < .. Tax Revenues 1994 1995 1996 1997' 1998 1999 One-cent State $1,183.2 $ 1 207.1 $1,228.7 $ 1 249 .9 $ 1 270.3 $1, 289.8 Gasoline Tax Revenues One-cent per Dollar State $22 ,40 9 .0 $23,529.0 $24,706.0 $25,941.0 $27, 238.0 $28,600. 0 Sa le s Tax Revenues Source : Florida Five-Year Statewide Transit Development Concepts Local Funding Sources Individua l County T ransportation Trust Funds Such trust funds receive money from sources includ ing the constitutional gas tax (2 0 percent of which goes to the counties), the county gas tax (72 percent of which is directed to the county trust funds), the state's fuel use tax (four percent of t h ese revenues go to the county trust fund s) alternative fuels tax (six percent of which is directly dist ributed to the counties) a local option gas tax (revenues may be used for any transportation-related purpose, and are subject to the standard 7.3 percent staie remittance to the general revenue fund), and the "ninth-cent" tax (also known as the Voted Gas Tax, after the state surcharge, full proceeds may be used for any legitimate county or municipal transportation purpose). Table 24 presents forecasts of revenues from a $0.05 local option gas tax for Escambia County for the years 1994 thro ugh 1999. The estimates were derived from forecast gasoline consumption rates for the county. Table 24 Forecast Revenues from a $0.05 Local Option Gas Tax in Escambia County 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 $6,095 025 $6,215 535 $6,326,775 $6 ,438 ,015 $6,539 985 $6, 641,955 Source: Florida F ive-Year Statewide Transit Development Concepts CHAPTER 7: PROPOS E D ECAT SERVICE PUN
CHAPTER 7: PROPOSED ECAT SERVICE PLAN Dedicated Millage Rates Currently four counties in Florida dedicate millage to their transit sys te m Such ad valorem taxes have been a major source of revenue for the systems In fiscal year 1991, more than 55 percent of Hillsborough Area Regional Transit s revenues originated from this source. In addition, Pinellas Suncoast Transit Authority was provided with more than 60 percent of its total resources from dedicated millage. The two other systems receiving revenue from dedicated millage rates are VOTRAN in Volusia County, and Lakeland Area Mass Transit in Polk County Local Option Sales Tax Another potential source of funding is through a local option sales tax with proceeds dedicated to public transit. Escambia County currently levies one of the six local option sales surtaxes at a rate of one percent Projected revenues from this tax for fiscal year 1993 were $21,472,000. Municipalities Individual municipalities rece1ve transportation funding primarily from the state-initiated municipal gas tax (revenues from which may be used for any leg i timate transportation purpose within the municipalit y) and the local option gas tax which was discussed previ ously (approx imately 29 percent of net proceeds are allocated to municipalities). MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL TRANSIT AUTHORITY I n recent years ECA T has had discussions regarding the potential extension of transit service to neighboring Santa Rosa County Given existing population trends, which show high levels of growth in Santa Rosa County, it is likely that there will be continued interest in this issue. In order to provide transit service outside of Escambia County, ECA T has three options: enter into an interlocal agreement with Santa Rosa County; upon certain provisions, become a regional transit authority under existing legislation; or enact "specific" legislation to fit the needs of the local area. PART/: SHORT-TERM STRATEGIES
PENSACOLA URBANIZED AREA TRANSIT IMPROVEMENT STRATEGY Currently only two of the 18 public transit "motor bus" operating agencies in Florida are able to operate bus service in more than one county under their current charters/policies. Nine of the remaining systems operate under the jurisdiction of County government, four under City government, and three others are independent authorities without the legislative ability to operate in other counties. Only the Hillsboroug h Area Regional Transit Authority (HART) in Tampa, and the Central Florida Regional Transportation Authority (Lynx ) in Orlando are legislatively set up to be able to operate transit service in more than one county. Lynx currently operates serviee in Osceola, Seminole and Orange counties. HART currently only operates service in Hillsborough County, though the Regional Transport ation Authorities Law under which it was established allows an adjoining county to join the Authority in its regional transportation area. Separate to this issue, HART and PSTA (in adjoining Pinellas County) both currently operate express bus service on adjoining bridges across county lines under interlocal agreements. HART was formed under Chapter 163.565 of the State of Florida Statutes as a "Reg i onal Transportation Authority" This legislation is not specific to HART though HART is currently the only authority formed under this legislation. The full Statute is contained in Appendix F of this report. This legislation allows any two or more contiguous counties, municipalities, other political subdivisions, or combinations to develop a charter under which a regional transportation authority may be constituted, composed, and operated. The board of directors of the authority shall consist of at least one director representing each member, and two directors appointed by the Governor. The purposes and powers of the Authority as stated in the legislation are: ... to purchase own, or operate, or provide for the operation of. transportation facilities; to contract for transit services; to exercise power of eminent domain limited to right-of-way and contiguous transportation facility acquisition and subject to further limitations set forth in the authority charter; to conduct studies; and to contract with other governmental agencies, private companies and individuals ... An int eresting power of the Regional Transportation Authority Statute is its Special Region Taxation provision. This provision allows any Regional Transportation Authority created under this statute to be deemed a special tax district and authorized to levy an ad val orem tax based on CHAPTER 7: PROPOSED ECAT SERVICE PLAN
CHAPTER 7: PROPOSED ECAT SERVICE PLAN full valuation of real property not to exceed 3 mills in the areas affected by the authority as approved by a majority of its members and by referendum. HART currently is authorized to tax at a rate of 0.50 mills. Lynx was recently formed under Chapter 343.61 of the State of Florida Statutes creating the "Central Florida Regional Transportation Authority" (see Appendix F) This statute is specific to the tluee counties of Osceola, Seminole and Orange in central Florida, and is similar to the Regional Transportation Authority legislation, except that there is no specific taxing powers contained in the legislation. Based on the near-term transit needs of adjoining Santa Rosa County, it is probably not necessary to undergo the formalized process of forming a Regional Transportation Authority alt hough the prospects of having the ability to implement a local ded icated funding source need to be considered. Further, the process to have local state legislatures enact a statute specific to the needs of the region may be burdensome and unnecessary. CUTR recommends that ECAT and Santa Rosa County develop an interlocal agreement for the provision of m ult i-county transit service to be operated by ECAT, including provisions for funding of associated capital and operating costs. PART 1: SHORT-TERM STRATEGIES
This is a blank page
CHAPTER 8: PROPOSED ECAT IMPLEMENTATION PLAN Chapter 8 PROPOSED ECAT IMPLEMENTATION PLAN MARKETING ANALYSIS Currently, ECA T has $38,000 budgeted for marketing and promotional activities Of this amount, approximately $3,000 per month is spent on radio, television and newspaper advertisements, other promotions and giveaway items (such as pens, pencils etc.). In addition, about $200 per month is spent on traffic promotions. As reported in a previous chapter, key local officials who were interviewed as part of this study emphasized the need for additional marketing activities to increase awareness of ECA T and to encourage discretionary riders to try the system. ECA T established a marketing department that has been increasingly active over the last two years. One way of gauging the level of marketing activity is to compare ECA T's marketing budget to those of other "peer" systems throughout Florida. These systems operate in areas of similar geograph i c size, and utilize fleets of similar size (in this case, the systems all operate between 10 and 49 motorbuses in maximum service). The systems also have other comparable operating characteristics. For this analysis, the peer systems are those Florida sys t ems used for ECAT in CUTR's annual Performance Evaluation of Florida's Transit Systems. Table 25 lists ECAT s peers. Table 25 ECA T's Florida Peer Transit Systems ECA T's Florida Peer Systems Gainesville Regional Transit System Tallahassee Transit Easl Vofusia Transit Lee County Transit Sarasota County Area Transit Lakeland Area Mass Transtt District Space Coast Area Transit (Brevard County) PART 1: SHORT-TERM STRATEGIES RTS Taltran VOTRAN LeeT r an SCAT Citrus Connection SCAT
PENSACOLA URBANIZED TRANSIT lMPROVE/IfENT STRATEGY Each of these agencies was contacted in order to gain knowledge concerning their marketing plans. The systems supplied CUTR with information such as their total marketing budgets, and how the money is spent. Table 26 shows the total marketing budgets for ECAT and its peers in fiscal year 1995. The budgets range from $23,000 (SCATBrevard County) to $130 000 (Citrus Connection) ECAT's total budget is approximately 34 percent below the peer group mean of $57.221.25. Table 26 Peer Analysis Marketing Budgets (FY 1995) System Marlletlng Budget Citrus Connection $130,000 SCAT-Sarasota $69,000 Taltran $67,000 RTS $50,000 leeTran $47,400 ECAT $38,000 VOTRAN $33,370 SCAT Brevard $23 000 P"rAverage $57,221 Lakeland's Citrus Connection has a marketing budget of$130,000. This amount includes $4,000 for advertising fees, such as if they need to hire a private contractor for their rider's digest, or for artwork and design. Most of the budget is allocated for radio and television advertising. They do not advertise much in the newspaper. In Sarasota, 25 percent of SCAT's marketing budget is for television promotions, another 25 percent is for radio advertising, and 20 percent is allocated for advertisements in the newspaper. Five percent of the budget goes to an "other" print media category, and 25 percent is classified as miscellaneous. Other types of marketing activities that SCAT i s involved in include spreads in "welcome" magazines and other similar media that tourists and new residents would pick up, CHAPTER 8: PROPOSED ECAT IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
CHAPTER 8: PROI'()SED ECAT IMPLEMEIYTATIOIY PLAN advertisements in high school programs for athletic events, advertisements in White Sox spring training programs, and booths at fairs. SCAT also uses giveaway promotional items such as pens, pencils, and magnets. Sometimes, SCAT utilizes direct mail campaigns. T he marketing budget varies from year to year, depending on the needs. If, for example, new service is introduced, greater percentages of the budget may be allocated for television radio or newspaper advertising. Taltran's marketing budget is categorized according to different marketing activities that occur throughout the year, or during certain times of t he year. For the year, $12,000 is budgeted for the ir media campaign (print advertising and car cards); $3 000 is budgeted for the design and product i on of printed customer information materials; $2,500 is allocated for the Employee Pass Program; $600 is for awards in the Employee Relations Program; and $9,000 is budgeted for a direct mail campaign (materials, processing and postage) which also targets new residents. $3,000 is also budgeted annually for miscellaneous marketing activities and supplies. Taltran also takes part in seasonal activities such as Christmas At The Plaza ($1 ,500 budgeted for pr emiums and lights) and Springtime Tallahassee ($3,500 for promotional and contest materials). For the Fourth of July Liberty Express, $2 000 is allocated for premiums and radio advertising. There is also a Summer Youth Pas s Program and a Back To School program that utilize printed materials and radio and print advertising. These programs are budgeted at $8,300 and $8,600, respectively Finally, funds are allocated for special events such as Tribe Ride and Spirit Express ($10 00()), and Transit Appreciation Day ($3,000). Gainesville RTS' $50,000 marketing budget consists of$35,000 for all advertising, and $15,000 for prin t ing costs. The Gainesville system concentrates on print advertising, and uses special brochures since, in its experience, the public responds better to print. Advertisements on television and radio have not been as successful. RTS is considering a campai gn involving advertisement packets hung on residents' doors. The pa c kets would contain system information and free bus tickets. However, they have faced some opposition from city officials who cite safety concerns such that if n o one is at the home to bring in the packets, the residence will appear obviously unoccupied (thus possibly becoming a target for crime). In fiscal year 1994, LeeTran budgeted $52, I 00 for promotional purposes, while $60,030 was actually allocated Of the actual amou nt 33 percent was budgeted for television advenising. PART/: SHORT-TEltlf STRATEGIES
PENSACOLA URBANIZED AREA TRANSIT LttPROVEMENT STRATEGY However, for fiscal year 1995, the marketing budget is $47,400, and no money is allocated for television. For advertisements in newspapers and other literature, $15,000 is budgeted; $23,400 is budgeted for route schedules and maps; and $3,000 is allotted for novelty items. Additionally, $6,000 is planned for supergraphic buses: LeeTran's current supergrapbic bus features dolphins and manatees. No specific info is available at this time for VOTRAN except the total budget amount of$33,370 VOTRAN is sending additional information, which will be included in the final report. Currently, Space Coast Area Transit (SCAT) in Brevard County has $23,000 budgeted for promotional activities. Some of the funds from this bu dget were used recently to redesign the system's logo. Also, radio commercials were u sed for the first time to a dvertise new service in the county and the new Saturday service. As a tradeoff, the radio station puts up signs on the interior of the buses. In addition, SCAT prints flyers and newspaper inserts, and uses giveaway items such as pens, pencils, and mugs. Recently, the system applied for a service development grant with the state ($50,000 would come from Brevard County and $50,000 would come from the stale) to be used in the development of a more sophisticated marketing plan. ECA T ranks sixth among the eight peer systems in terms of marketing expenditures, and is approximately $20 ,000 below the average amount. It should be noted, however, that the average is driven up by the unusually large marketing budget for the Citrus Connection; the average marketing budget excluding the Lakeland system is $46 824, almost $9,000 higher than ECA T' s budg eted amount. The observations by the various systems on the relative effectiveness of print, television and radio advertising suggest a lack of consensus. It may be that the effectiveness of a given medium depends on the target audience, or the nature of the local market. Other contributing factors include the frequency with which an advertisement is run and the quality of the advertisement itself. Another useful measure of marketing budgets i s budget per thousand riders. Table 2.7 presents the marketing expenditures per thousand riders for the peer systems. The FY 1995 marketing budgets are used in Table 27, along with the most recent validated ridership data (FY 1993). CHAPTER 8: PROPOSED ECAT IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
CHAPTER 8: PROPOSED ECAT IMPLEMENTATION PLAN The marketing budgets per thousand riders vary dramatically, from a low of $10.28 for VOTRAN to a high of $174.24 for SCATBrevard. ECAT ranks fourth on this list at $30.14, slightly below the peer average of $30.51. On a per-rider basis, then, ECA T' s marketing budget is typical of budgets for agencies of its size. Per-rider marketing expenditures ean be somewhat misleading. There is a certai n level of fixed costs in marketing programs, since an advertisement gains in effec ti veness with repetition. Once a decision to use print, television or radio is made, sufficient resources must be allocated to ensure that the media selected are used appropriately. One of the worst decisions that a marketing department can make, typically in using a more expensive medium such as telev isio n, i s to restrict the frequen cy of advertisements to the point at which they are ineffective. In addition, an argument can be made that low-ridership systems should spend proportionately more in marketing to increase their ridership. SCAT Brevard is a good example of the need to interpret these findings with care. SCAT Brevard has only recently begun to supply fixed-route bus service within its service area. It has the lowest ridership and the lowest marketing budget among the eig ht peer systems. Howe ver it ranks highest in budget per thousand riders. This is primarily a reflection of its market situation and its intention to promote growth in fixed-route transit ridership, but without this knowledge one could interpret the results shown in Table 27 as indicating that the agency is spend ing too much on marketing Table 27 Peer Analysis Marketing Budget per Rider Marketing Ridership In Budget per System Budget Thousands Thousand (FY 1995) (FY 1993) Riders SCAT -Brevard $23,000 132.00 $174.24 Citrus Connection $130 ,000 981.91 $132.40 SCAT Sarasota $69 000 1 317.85 $52 36 ECAT $38,000 1,260 .87 $30.14 LeeTran $47 400 1,748.92 $27.10 RTS $50 000 2,370.20 $21.10 Taltran $67.000 3,944.23 $16 .99 VOTRAN $33,370 3.247.41 $10.28 P""r Average $57,221 1,875 .42 $30.51 PART 1: SHORT-TERM STRATEGIES
PENSACOLA URBANIZED AREA TRANSIT IMPROVEMENT STRATEGY In summary, ECAT's marketing budget is below the average budget for systems of similar size (its peer systems). In tenns of budget per thousand riders, ECAT is close to average. Given the expressed intentions of key local officials in Escambia County to increase awareness of the transit system, particularly among discretionary riders who have other travel options available, CUTR recommends that ECA T consider moderate increases in the marketing budget, as funding becomes available. A marketing budget in the range of $40,000 to $50,000 would be appropriate to help ECAT achieve its goals. Creative use of trade (or in-kind) agreements with local media (e .g ., trading advertising space on brochures, the ride guide, system map, or the buses themselves in exchange for newspaper space or air ti me ) should be pursued as a means to increase marketing activities without increasing the marketing budget. CAPITAL PLAN With the recent purchase of twelve 30-foot Orion buses in 1992, along with the construction and successful implementation of the new Transfer Center at Fairfield Drive and L Street, ECAT has positively positioned itself in regard to major capital purchases for the near future. The only major capital purchases in the near tenn involve the continued planned replace ment of the General Motors buses purchased in 1974. Table 28 presents the projected ECAT capital purchases for the next five years. As shown in T able 28, five 30-foot buses will be purchased in both fiscal years 1995 and 1996, and three buses are scheduled for purchase in 1997. This will complete the s hort term bus replacement needs of the system. Based on the cwrent bus fleet size, it will not be necessary for ECA T to purchase expansion buses in the near future, even with the need for an additional peak bus to implement the proposed expansion of service on Route II. The cost for the purchase of the thirteen 30-foot replacement buses is $2,860,000 or $220,000 per bus Other capital items schedu l ed for purchase during this time period include miscellaneous maintenance equipment projected at $75,000 per year and office and computer equipment at $5,000 for 1995; $7,000 for 1996; and $2,000 for each year through 2000. The total projected c ost for this capital plan through FY 2000 is $3,330,000. CHAPTER 8: PROPOSED ECAT IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
CHAPTER 8: PROPOSED CAT I MPLEMENTATION PLAN Tabl e 2 8 E CA T C apital A c quisition Pl a n I t e m Units to be Cost. Total Fiscal Y ear Purch ased per U n it Project Cost o f P u rc h a s e 30-fo o t Rep l aceme n t Bus e s 5 $220,000 $ 1,100 000 1995 Miscellaneous Main tena nce Equipment NA NA $75 000 1995 Office and Compute r Equipment NA NA $5,000 1995 -----------------------------......................... ------------------------------30-foot Replacement Buses 5 $220 000 $1, 100,000 1996 Miscella neou s Mai ntenance Equi pment NA NA $75.000 1996 Office and Comp uter Equipment NA NA $7 000 1996 ------------------------------------------------------------30-foo t Rep l acement Buses 3 $220 000 $ 660 000 1997 M i scellaneo u s Maintenance Equipm ent NA NA $75,000 1997 Office and Computer Equipment NA NA $2,000 1 997 ----------------------------------------------------------M i scellaneous Maintenance E q uipment NA NA $75,000 1998 Office a n d Comp u ter Equipment NA NA $2,000 1 998 -------------------------------------------...................... ......... .......................... .................................... M iscellaneous Maintenance Equipment NA NA $75 000 1999 Office a n d Computer Equ ipment NA N A $2 000 1999 ---------------------------------.............................. --------------------------------M iscellaneous Maintenance Equi pment N A NA $75.000 2000 Office a n d Computer Equipment NA NA $2 000 2000 IMPLEM E NT AT ION PLAN Several s h ort-term recommendations have been advanced in previous technical memoranda and reports. T hese are summarized in this sect ion by general category (fleet composition, ro u tes and schedules, and marketing), and an implementation schedule is suggested Fleet C o m posit i o n At the beg i nning of this project, CUTR addressed the opti mal size of a transit vehic l e in operat ion in Escambia County. The recommendat ion was t o continue to use 30-foot buses, similar to those newly purchased in 1992, and not to switch t o vans or smaller buses. As noted in the previo u s PART]: SHORT-TERM STRATEGIES
PENSACOLA URBANIZED AREA TRANSIT IMPROVEMENT STRATEGY section, the capital plan anticipates a continuation of the bus replacement program, so that by FY 1997, ECA T will have 25 thirty-foot buses in its fleet. The origirtal bus replacement schedule is still valid and should be followed. Routes and Schedules Chapter 7 included a series of route and schedule recommendations, summarized below: restructure Routes I and 3; straighten Route 13 along Ninth Avenue; restore midday service on Route 2; adjust the Route 6 schedule; shorten the turnaround path for Route 6 in downtown ; increase frequency of service on Route II; institute evening service; split Routes 5 and 9 into separate routes; restructure Route 12. The first step in implementation is to present the findings and recommendations at the Commissioners' Forum in February 1995. CUTR will then make a presentation to the Pensacola Urbanized Area Metropolitan Planning Organization at its March meeting. After the Commissioners and the MPO have been informed of these recommendations and have offered comments or revisions, ECA T should hold a public hearing on the package of route and sehedule changes. Not all of the recommendations warrant a public hearing which is generally required if more than I 0 percent of service on a route is affected, but it makes sense to include everything in the hearing so that the public is fully informed and has a chance to comment on each of the proposals. ECAT will then decide whether to implement some or all of the recommendations, based on public reaction. With the exception of the increased frequency on Route II and evening service the net fiscal result of the other recommendations is positive. Thus, the proposals for Routes I, 2, 3, 5 6, 9, 12, and 13 can be implemented at the first opportunity after the public hearing. Route II and evening service will require Service Development funds from the state ECA T should apply for CHAPTER 8: PROPOSED ECAT IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
CHAPTER 8: PROPOSED ECAT lMPLEliiENTATION PLAN Service Development grants for both projects. Service Development money generally becomes available in July, and the application will need to be completed early in the spring. Because of the tight time frame, ECA T should prepare applications for both projects in advance of the public hearing, so that they can be submitted immediately (assuming a positive public response). The changes to Routes I, 3, and 12 deserve careful monitoring, including periodic ride checks to determine where hoardings and alightings occur along the routes, over the course of the first year of implementation. In early 1996, ECAT should evaluate the performance of all three routes using the productivity evaluation model described in a previous technical memorandum, and decide whether the routes warrant continuation. Route I is of particular concern, since it currently falls below the cutoff point suggested by the proposed guidelines. An alternative to Route 12 for serving the George Stone Vocational Center is the proposed crosstown route via Michigan Avenue and Brent Lane, with an eastern terminus at P JC. If Route 12' s performance continues to be of concern, then ECAT can choose to replace it with the crosstown route or to shorten Route 12 so that it operates only as far north as Michigan Avenue, and add the crosstown route as a new route. In the latter case, ECA T should apply for Service Development funds for F'Y !997 to institute the new crosstown route. Marketing Marketing a public transportation system is usually undertaken for several reasons. One is to increase awareness of the system as a travel alternative. A second reason is educational, providing specific information that people need to know about the system in order to use it, such as destinations, schedules, fares, hours of operation and bus stop locations. A third reason is to inform riders and/or the general public about upcoming special promotions, a new service or changes to the system. While encouraging use of the system underlies all of these reasons, campaigns targeted to specific segments of the population (e.g., shoppers, commuters, residents in a particular neighborhood) is a fourth reason to market transit. In a society where travel is dominated by the automobile, the mere existence of a transit system is not sufficient to attract riders. This is particularly true in a locale such as Escambia County, where there are no major parking or congestion problems. PART 1: SHORT-TERllf STRATEGIES
PENSACOLA URBANIZED AREA TRANSIT IMPROVEMENT STRATEGY ECA T' s 1994 Marketing Plan contained standard and innovative ideas on getting the word out about transit and making E CAT more a part of the conununity. One item mentioned in the plan that is worthy of additional attention is the Transit Pass Conunuter Benefit Program. Effective January I, 1993, a provision in the Comprehensive National Energy Strategy law enables employers to provide employees with a transportation fringe benefit of up to $60 per month. The benefit is for use by employees making the trip to work on public transportation or by vanpools. Any amount up to $60 per month is tax free for the employee and the benefit is a t a x -ded uctib le, ordinary business expense by the employer. Some transit agencies manage their own program, but there are private corporations that provide the service to transit agencies wishing to issue transit vouchers for the purchase of transit fare media. As quoted from the American Public Transit Association Transit Pass Tool Kit, the basic provisions of the law are as follows: Among the fringe benefits employers may provide, the new transportation fringe benefit allows firms to purchase transit passes or fare media or vouchers that can be used by employees to purchase fare media, and provide the passes, media, or vouchers to any employee at no cost or at a discounted cost. The value of a free or discounted pass, media, or voucher up lo $60 per month is a tax-free benefit to the employee. If the monthly value of the benefit exceeds $60, the employee is liable for income tax only on the amount over $60. Since ECAT's monthly pass costs $30 ($20 for the Blue Angel Express pass), this provision is not a concern. Employers may deduct their cost of the transit to $60 monthly per employee-as an ordinary business expense Commuters who drive to park-and-ride lots in order to use public transportation or car/vanpools for the commute to work may receive up to $155 in tax-free parking benefits from their employer in addition to the $60 per month transit commute benefit. CHAPTER 8: PROPOSED ECAT IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
CHAPTER 8: PROPOSED ECAT IMPLEMENTATION PLAN From a transit operator's point of view, market in g should begin by targeting the small employer market. Although greater effort is involved in this approach, given the large number of small firms, small employers are likely to be more receptive because the benefit is a lower cost alternative to providing cash. Transit voucher programs allow small businesses to distinguish its benefits from the large employers. This increases the number of employers enrolled in the program. It will also contribute to the decision of large employers to accept the program to maintain a comp e titive edge in recruiting via its compensation and benefits programs. Transit voucher programs are available in many major cities including New York, Philadelphia, San Francisco, and Washington D.C. The administration of the program can take many forms including a contract with non-profit organizations (e.g., Transit Center in New York), a contract with for-profit businesses (Commuter Check Corporation in Philadelphia and San Francisco) and a largely self-administered program (WMATA in Washington, D.C.) Another type of program is the Eco Pass program in Denver. It is an annual, unlimited-use photo identification pass covering transportation on all routes operated by the public transit agency. Employers purchase passes and provide them to all their employees as a fringe benefit. Prices paid are determined by the level of adjacent transit service and the size of the employer. The annual cost ranges from $25 per employee for an employer with at least 250 employees and l ow levels of transit service to $180 per employee for a large employer with at least 65 daily bus trips i n prox imi ty to the employer. The price structure is based on estimates of lost farebox revenue as well as increases to service, capital costs, and administrative costs. The unit cost per employee is low because the cost is spread among the entire work force A guaranteed ride home program accompanies the program in the event the individual has a personal emergency and needs to leave work early. Eco Pass program is on a larger scale than what ECAT can reasonably pursue now, but it offers an interesting concept for possible future use. CUTR recommends that ECAT establish a transit pass commuter benefit program in 1995. It may be pos s ibl e to work through the Chamber of Commerce, the Downtown Improvement Board, University Mall, and Cordova Mall to publicize the program among small businesses The program allow s ECA T to target commuters, an important market for increasing transit usage The tax benefits associated with th is program offer a real inducement for businesses to become PART]: SlfORTTERM STRATEGIES
PENSACOLA URBANIZED AREA TRANSIT IMPROVEMENT STRATEGY partners with transit. ECA T should be able to administer the program itself, barring an overwhelming initial response. ECA T may also wish to investigate ways to encourage transit usage among public employees of the city and the county. A program to purchase passes at work, similar to the commuter benefit program but without the tax benefits for the (public) employer, is one way to encourage purchase of mo nthly passes and increased use of the transit system In general, marketing activities should be continued and expanded, if sufficient funding is found. As shown in the first section of this report, ECA T's marketing budget is at the low end of the range for systems within Florida in its peer group. Well-conceived and properly executed marketing programs and campaigns can pay for themselves with increased ridership, and they offer the added bonus of increased good will within the community. CHAPTER 8: PROPOSED ECAT IMPLEMENTA T ION PLAN
This is a blank page
CHAPTER 9: TRANSIT STRATEGIES FOR CONGESTION MANAGEMENT Chapter 9 TRANSIT STRATEGIES FOR CONGESTION MANAGEMENT U nlike previous chapters, this portion of the report shifts the study's focus to the long term particularly the year 2020. The Pensacola Urbanized Area MPO is in th e p r ocess of updating its 2020 transportation study Plan Update The purpose of Chapter 9 i s to deve l op transit strategies to be included for evaluation as part of the Congestion Management System in the plan update. While the year 2020 is the primary focus for this undertaking, the interim years 2000 and 2005 will also receive attention. The first section in this chapter identifies congested corridors for the y ear 2020, 2005 and the current year. This information has been provided by Po s t Buckl e y Schuh and Jernigan, the consultant developing the year 2020 Plan Update. "Deficient" corridors (i.e., roadways operat i ng at an unacceptable level of congestion) have been defined on a series of maps For the year 2005, deficiencies are evaluated with respect to the "E+C" network that represents existing roadways plus those committed to be built by 2005. For the year 2020 deficiencies are evaluated with respect to the 20 1 5 Needs Plan Network under the assumption that needed roadway improvements identified in the previous transportation study for the year 2015 are in place by that time Congested corridors within the current ECA T service area receive the greatest attention in the current year and 2005. The second section identifies transit-related strategies that can h el p to alleviate congestion. This section also summarizes the transit network and service frequencies expected to be operated in the years 2 005 and 2020. The third section identifies strategies beyond the fixed-route transit network that may be appropriate for inclus i on in the plan update. These include transportation demand strategies as well as land use and access management concepts discussed in greater detail in Chapter I 0. P ART II: LONG-TERM STRATEGIES
PENSACOLA URBANIZED ARE4 TRANSIT IMPROVEMENT STRATEGY CONGESTED CORRIDORS Figure 50 show s existing roadway deficiencies and the current transit service coverage area Most of the congested corridors are within the existing service area. Brent Lane is an interesting exception, beca use there is no crosstown service in that area. The Pensacola Bay Bridge also stands out as a congested location outside of the service area. Figure 51 shows projected roadway deficiencies for the year 2000 assuming th e e>listing roa d network plus committed improvements (E+ C). Once again, Brent Lane and the Pensacola Bay Bridge are the obvious congested corridors outside of the existing service area, along with a portion of Michigan Avenue. Figure 52 presents projected roadway deficiencies for the year 2005 on the E+C netwo rk. Figure 53 presents the same information for the year 2020, assuming the 2015 needs network is in p l ace These figures aid in identifying congested locations where route extensions and/or impro v ed frequencies are warranted as congestion mit i gation measures. Possible transi t strategies are d i scussed in the next section. TRANSIT STRA TEGJES There are several possible actions for transit agencies to take in attempts to mitigate congestion. One major probl e m is that buses encounter the same level of roadwa y traffic and congestion that automobiles face, and so it is difficult to attract passengers by improving travel times in congested conditions unless a separate right-of-way is provided for the transit vehicle For buses, this would generally translat e to a high-occupancy-vehicle (HOV) lane, in which only vehicles carrying at least two passengers would be lawfully permitted. Short of constructing special-use lanes, however there are alternatives that can make the transit system more attractive to potential riders and thus help to provide some congest i on relief CHAPTER 9: TRANSIT STRATEGIES FOR CONGESTION MANAGEMENT
Figure 50 Existing Roadway Deficiencies and Transit Service Coverage Area
This is a blank page
Figure 51 Year 2000 Roadway Deficiencies (E&C) and Transit Service Coverage Area
This is a blank page
F i g ure 52 Year 2005 Roadway Deficiencies (E and C) and Transit Service Coverage Area
This is a blank page
Figure 53 Year 2020 Roadway Deficiencies (E&C) and Transit Service Coverage Area
This is a blank page
CHAPTER 9: TRANSIT STRATEGIES FOR CONGESTION MANAGEMENT Transit strategies presented in this section incl u de the following: expansion of the transit network and service area; improved frequency; HOV corridors; increased transit amenities; innovative service. Each of these strategies is discussed b e low in greater detail. Expansion of the Transit Network This is perhaps the most straightforward option, involving route extensions and new service to growing areas outside the current service area. From th e standpoint of conge s tion management these extensions should be tailored to serve the most congested roadways. These roadways are often located in fast-growing areas, but there are also extensive segments that are defic i ent within the current service area. T hi s strategy addresses the congested roadways currently unserved by the ECA T route network. Areas of particular interest include: the Pace and Milton areas in Santa Rosa County ; Gulf Breeze and Pensacola Beach; east-west roadways within the current service area that are candidates for crosstown s e rvice. Within the next five years, congestion levels and the number of deficient roadways outside the existing ECAT service area are relatively minor. The bridge connecting Pensacola and Gulf Breeze is problematic there are roadway deliciencies in Milton and by the year 2000 there will be increased congestion along U.S. 98 in Gulf Breeze. ECA T is not at a point where it is ready to extend service outside of Escambia County; the short-term recommendations focus on strengthening the existing network. However, the short-term recommendations did include the possibility of instituting crosstown service via Michigan Avenue and Brent Lane between Mobile Highway and 12th Avenue. By the year 2000 this should become a reality helping to address congest i on along Brent Lane between Old Palafox Highway and 12th Avenue and along portions of Michigan Avenue PART 1/: LONG-TERM STRATEGIES
PENSACOLA URBANIZED AREA TRANSIT IMPROVEMENT STRATEGY By the year 2005, congestion along Airport Boulevard may justify additional crosstown service in this corridor between the airport and Old Palafox Highway. In the southwestern portion of Escambia County, increased congestion along Lillian and Gulf Beach Highways suggests the possibility of route extensions or (a more likely alternative) the institution of some type of limited-stop service similar to the current Blue Angel Express. The transit network in the year 2005 is also expected to include service to Pensacola Beach and G ulf Breeze. Express service connecting Pace and Milton with Pensacola will be added to the ECAT route network by the year 2020. It is anticipated that this service will operate along U.S. 90 and Davis Highway. Within Milton, a small circulator system might operate as a feeder service that also provides local accessibility. Express service will also be provided along the I-lOII-I 10 corridors, connecting Avalon Beach with Pensacola. The year 2020 might be the time tor a northward extension of service along Pensacola Boulevard/Route 29. Improved Frequency Given the existing structure of the ECA T system, with timed transfers at the Transfer Center on the hour and the half-hour and most routes operating one bus every hour, improving frequency generally translates to doubling service on a particular route. Since this is a fairly dramatic and costly change, it has been recommended in the s hort -term (i.e., before the year 2000) only for Route I I. The route evaluation process did identify other routes that are logical candidates for increased frequency ; in this section, a time frame for these improvements is suggested. In 2005, it is anticipated that the frequency of service will be two buses per hour on Route 5 (9th Avenue) and Route I 4 (NAS). If the changes to Routes I and 3 are not permanent, then Route 15 would also have a frequency of two buses per hour, but the revised Route 3 provides additional service along the busiest portion of Route 15. Service on Route 18 (Blue Angel Express) will increase from seven trips per day to 12 trips per day. Route 9 (Davis Highway) will be extended to serve the Un iversity of West Florida with hourly frequency a long the current Route 9S path, resulting in an effective improvement in service frequency to Route 9S. CHAPTER 9: TRANSIT STRATEGIES FOR CONGESTION MANAGEMENT
CHAPTER 9: TRANSI T STRATEGIES FOR CONGESTION MANAG E MENT Route 9 and the crosstown Michigan/Brent route will both have frequencies of two buses per hour by the year 2020 while Route 16 will operate four buses per hour. No other frequency changes ar c anticipated. High-Occupancy Vehicle Lanes As noted above HOV Janes provide a clear travel time differential in favor of transit vehicles and carpoo l s, and so are an effective means of persuading potential riders to use transit. HOV lanes work best on limited-access highways, although large cities have established bus-only Janes at times of the day on aJ:terial streets. Congestion is a prerequisite for institut ing HOY lanes. Given projected roadway conditions in the Pensacola urbanized area, HOV lanes on I-10 and I I I 0 would be an effective alternative only in the year 2020. However there are l ess capital intensive means to give preferential treatment to high occupancy vehicles. For example an HOV toll booth on the Bob Sikes Bridge to Pensacola Beach would encourage carpooling to the beach in the peak season and at other times wben ther e is congestion, in addition to encouraging transit ridership when a beach route is established Another proposal to encourage transit use is to equip buses with devices that pre-empt the red cycle at traffic signals, thus allowing buses to avoid red lights, increase their average speed and decrease their travel time. The signal pre-emption concept has been discussed for some time without widespread support from traffic engineers, who tend to favor the overall coordination of t raffic signals on major streets as a measure to improve the flow of all traffic. This strategy is unlikely to receive approval in Escambia County, where transit accounts for a small portion of all travel. In order for HOV lanes to be successful, entry to and exit from the lanes must be carefully designed to minimize conflicts with regular traffic. Provisions for enforcement m u st also be a part of any HOY implementat ion. Most importantly, park-and-ride lots should be constructed at key outlying locations to serve as a gathering or transfer point for express buses utilizing the HOY lanes. These lots should be paved and contain amenities for waiting passengers (bus shelters and benches, kiosks with schedule information, newspaper machines, and the like). The lots sh ou ld also be well lighted and visible from the highway and surrounding streets. PART ll: LONG-TERM STRATEGIES
PENSACOLA URBANIZED AR&i TRANSIT IMPROVEMENT STRATEGY Transit Amenities A discussion of amenities for the transit system runs the risk of being vague since "amenities" can be int erpreted to encompass a wide variety of imp rovements and the provision of amenities has an indirect effect on ridership, i.e., encourages ridership by improving the image of the system One recent example of an amenity that has helped ECA T is the new transfer facility By providing a clean, modem facility with excellent visibility, protection from the weather and ample room for waiting passengers, ECA T has clearly made its system more user friendly. T he new buses placed in operation and on order can also be considered amenities. Less dramatic examples inc l ude bus shelters and benches and actions to increase information and awareness of the transit system. The schedule of new bus purchases will mod ernize ECAT's fleet completely by the year 2000. For the purposes of the Congestion Management System, major amenities proposed include a "satellite transit centers" in downtown Pensacol a (in the vicinity of Government and Palafox Streets) and at park-and-ride locations, and the introduction of electronic fare media. A satellite transit center is not a major transfer facility like the Transfer Center on Fairfield Drive, but is an on-street (or in-lot) concentration of bus shelters and kiosks w ith transit schedule and route information, with the ECAT logo prominently displayed. T hese are intended to establish a transit presence in key locations and to provide passengers with a convenient and safe area to wait for the bus. Electronic fare media such as proposed new "Smart Cards credit cards or ATM debit cards with a computer chip added, have the potential to make radical changes in fare collection methods, with an added bonus of collecting passenger information automatically. The next few years will see the gradual introduction of this new technology in the transit industry starting with the larger systems. By the year 2005, it is reasonable to expect many smaller systems to be using this technology as well. By simplifying fare collection and making it less of a separate e x e rcise (i.e., fishing in one's pockets for change), new fare media could induce transit usage by discretionary riders CHAPTER 9: TRANSIT STRATEGIES FOR CONGESTION MANAGEMENT
CHAPTER 9: TRANSIT STRATEGIES FOR CONGESTION MANAGEMENT Service Delivery Mixes/Innovative Services ECA T recently introduced the Blue Angel Express, providing limited-stop service between NAS and the Pensacola Airport. This is an example of an innovative service concept intended to attract discretionary riders by reducing travel time and making transit usage as convenient and appealing as possible. As ECA T expands, there will be a greater need to consider similar innovations, because trave l time is a greater factor with longer distances. Express bus service, in conjunction with park and ride lots at outlying locations, is one possib le act ion Express service differs from limited-stop service in that a large portion of an express route is operated non-stop, often on interstate highways or similar roads. Proposed service to Milton and Pace would almost certainly be express service, as might service extensions in southwestern Escambia County and north along Route 29. One purpose of park and ride lots is to widen the catchment area for a bus route. Instead of relying solely on passengers with i n walking d istanc e of a route, an agency constructs park and ride lots to attract passengers within a three-to-five mile radius An alternate way to expand the catchment area is to provide feeder bus service. In areas like Pace and Milton a small (van sized) shuttle could be used as a circulator to enhance the attractiveness and encourage use of the express serv i ce. Such a circulator system could be operated by ECA T, by the local CTC provider in Santa Rosa County, or by a private agency Given an upsurge of recent interest in trolleys, it is also likely that a downtown circulator trolley will be in operation in the near future, as well as a trolley along Pensaco la Beach, possibly linked with Fort Pickens. Summary of Proposed Transit Networks for the Years 2000, 2005 and 2020 Table 29 summarizes proposed improvements to ECAT's s ystem for the year 2020 and for the interim years 2000 and 2005. These changes to the existing system represent the routes and frequencies needed as input to the long-range model. All improvements, including transit amenities are included in Table 29. PART 1/: LONG-TERM STRATEGIES
PENSACOLA URBA N IZED AREA T RANSIT IMPR O VEMENT STRATEGY Table 29 P r o posed C bang es for Esca mbi a C oun ty Area Transit Year Action Routes Affecte d Restructure Routes 1 3 12, 13 Loop Into Two Routes 5, 9 M i dday Service 2 Even i ng Service 5 9 1 1 13, 14/1 5 2000 Increased Frequency (2 buses per hour) 11 Mi c h igan/Brent C r osstown Route Downtown and B each Tro l leys New Buses Serv ice E xt ensions: Ai rport BlVd. Crosstow n Route Lill ian Hig h way Gulf Beach Hig h way Pensaco l a Beach/Gu l f Breeze UWF 9 95 2005 I ncreased Frequency: 2 buses per hour 5 14 12 trips per day 18 Other: HOV Toll Booth Bob S i kes Bridge Downtown Satellite Ce n ter New Fare Media Express Serv i ce: M ilton/Pace via us 90 A v alon Parll v i a 1-10/1110 HOV Lanes : 1-10/l110 Parll and R ide Lots 2020 C i rculators: Mil t on, Pace G u l f Breeze Nort hwest Exten s ion alon g Roule 29 10A, 10B Increased Frequency: 2 buses per h o u r 9 M i chigan / Brent Crosstown 4 buses pe r h our 1 6 CHAP TER 9: T RANSIT S TRATEGI E S FOR CONGES TION M A NAGEMENT
CHAPTER 9: TRANSIT STRATEGIES FOR CONGESTION MANAGEMENT OTHER STRATEGIES While transit strategies are the focal point of this chapter, there are related strategies worth mentioning here. These fall into the general categories of transportation demand management (TDM) land use, and access management. Transportation Demand Management TDM strategies are intended to shift the demand for travel in various ways to reduce levels of congestion Flextime allows workers to arrange their work hours to suit their travel preferences, thus reducing the number of commuters on the road during the peak hour. Telecommuting removes the need for a work trip altogether. Actions to encourage transit usage and carpool and vanpool formation are also i ncluded under TDM. A TDM strategy that has the greatest effe ct on congestion is parking policy. Increasing the cost and decreasing the supply of parking in downtowns or major employment centers will induce commuters to try transit or to form carpools. As is often the case however the most effective action is the least politically acceptable. While parking costs are sure to rise between now and 2020, it is unlikely that there will be a deliberate policy adopted anywhere in the urbanized area to restrict parking and/or increase its cost. One promising TDM strategy for Escambia County is a vanpool program oriented toward NAS. Brevard County has established a very successful vanpool program with the Kennedy Space Center as a primary market. There are several similarities between the situations in the two counties: the major employer is a government facility located in a comer of the county. The vanpool possibility should be investigated more thoroughly when the new training center opens at NAS. Some forward-looking transit agencies around the country have moved in recent years beyond managing a traditional bus system to become "mobilit y managers ." T hese agencies operate carpool and vanpool programs in an attempt to provide the greatest number of alternatives to the single-occupant automobile, especially for the segment of the population that depends on transit for its mobility. Transit has sometimes considered ridesharing programs to be part of its PART 1/: LONG-TERM STRATEGIES
PENSACOLA UIIJIANIZED AREA TRANSIT IMPROVEMENT STRATEGY competition, but this emerging viewpoint stresses a willingness to provide travel alternatives to appeal to the broadest possib l e number of people. A commuter assistance program currently exists in Escambia County. One future option is to shift management of the vanpool program to ECA T if the agency chooses to move in the direction of mobility management. A combination of local and limited stop bus service and vanpools could effect ively serve future employment growth at NAS. Transit-Friendly Lll nd Use Chapter I 0 addresses land use strategies that foster transit usage. Several points are worth highlight ing here. Mixed use activity centers reduce the need to rely on the automobile for work, shopping and entertainment. Coordination of development with the transit agency can lead to small design improvements that make a great difference in transit's ability to serve the development. Sidewalks and pedestrian access are also key factors in encouraging the use of transit. Transit considerations should be integrated into development r eview. Access Management Access manageme n t seeks to control the number of curb cuts and thus reduce the number of locations where turning movements are likely to occur Access management benefits general traffic flow more so than it directly encourages transit ridership. The planning principles involved, however help transit in terms of focusing activity in certain areas of a typical city block. This can affect the location of bus stops, which in turn can reduce the distance passengers must walk after alighting SUMMARY The transit-related strategies included in this chapter can be appli ed as part of the br oader congest ion management system for the Pensaco l a Urbanized Area. Table 29 traces the sugges ted evo lut ion of the ECAT system over the next 25 years to meet changing levels of demand and patterns of development. While it is certain that unanticipated events will infl uence the ultimat e design of the transit network these strategies provide a blueprint for tra nsit's long-term future in Escambia County. CHAPTER 9: TRANSIT STRATEGIES FOR CONGESTION MANAGEMENT
CHAPTER 10: LAND USE AND ACTTVITY CENTER STRATEGIES Chapter 10 LAND USE AND ACTIVITY CENTER STRATEGIES INTRODUCTION Although building new roads or adding more lanes are important to an efficient transportation system, these strategies alone are not sufficient. Every community faces limits to road-based solutions. In some neighborhoods, right-of-way wiU not be a_vailable without destroying many homes and businesses There are times when a new or wider road would seriously damage community character or the envirorunent. And every goverrunent faces financial limits as to what it is able to provide and maintain in tenns of roads or bridges. A strategic approach to transportation recognizes that capital improvements are not enough. We must also look for better ways to manage our existing system Providing for transit, pedestrian, and bicycle transportation is part of this overall strategy. But land use decisions have constrained transit alternatives in some areas. It will be cost prohibitive to serve communities with fast and convenient public transportation without also addressing land use and development patterns. To promote more strategic approaches to managing congestion, the lntennodal Surface Transportatio n Efficiency Act of 1991 directs Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs) to incorporate congestion management strategies into the lo ng range transportation planning process. Land use management and activity center strategies, measures to support transit, and transportation demand management are among the list of congestion management strategies that must be considered. ISTEA also requires greater attention to connectivity between transportation modes, increased modal opportunities and choice, and greater coordinatio n and cooperation between planners, users, and providers t o beuer manage travel demand. It is essential to public and private transportation that communities mcrease future travel alternatives rather than diminish them Fortunately there are a variety of land use strategies lo cal governments can use to maximize future travel options and manage traffic congestion. PART 11: LONG-TERM STRATEGIES
PENSACOI..A URBANIZED AR&-1 TRANSIT IMPROVEMENT STRATEGY These land use strategies are the subject of this chapt er of the Pensacola Transit Improvement Strategy. How Land Use Influence s Transit Improving bus service requires more than adding new buses or more routes. Decisions regarding the location of land uses also affect transit routes and ridership. If land uses that generate transit ridership are located along existing transit routes, then route productivity improves. Locating such land uses outside an existing service area, however may result in the need to extend routes resulting in longer headways and less convenient service-both disincentives to transit use. Thus, transit and land use form an interdependent cycle that can either reinforce or thwart transit service. Transit compatible land use decisions are one way to build transit ridership and ultimately reduce headways, without the risk and uncertainty of major capital outlays for additional routes or buses. One example of this interaction can be found along Route 12 Saufley/George Stone, which ranked-fourth from the last in terms of productivity. The decision t o locate the George Stone Vocational School on Longleaf Drive, rather than within the service area of the more productive transit routes to the south and east, resulted in the need to operate Route 12 further north. Yet the increase in ridership from the Vocational School is not sufficient to offset the lower overall productivity. Density and Traffic Congestion Many communities respond to traffic by reducing density or by keeping densities low. Yet the traffic problem originates less from high density growth, than from growth in single occupant vehicle travel, which is a byproduct of low density, single use development patterns. Alternatively, higher densities accommodating a mix of uses are necessary to sustain alternative modes of transportation. Unfortunately, density has become a key public indicator of good and bad in local zoning decisions. T he real issue, however, is not density; it is the character of development. With CHAPTER 10: LAND USE AND ACTIVITY CENTER STRATEGIES
CHAPTER 10: LAND USE AND ACTIVITY CENTER STRATEGIES att ention to urban design, landscaping and layout, higher densities and infill can add to the character of a community and neighborhood. Maximum allowable densities should be reasonable given the context of the surrounding area, but higher than the very low commercial densities typical of suburban-style zoning. This does not mean that low density alternatives are not needed. Every community needs a balance of various types of living environments, that includes low d ensity and rural living. In fact, a program to encourage higher densities in urbanized areas will help preserve the character of lower density and rural areas by controlling the onset of commercial strips and suburban-style subdivisions. Transit, Connectivity, and the Land Use Mix Transit, walking, and bicycling operate more efficiently in communities with a finer mix of land uses and an inter -connected street system. Transit also depends upon the pedestrian environment at the beginning and end of the trip. Key destinations must be within walking distance of transit stops and accessible via sidewalk. Pedestrian systems, including lighting, sidewalks and street trees, can be improved to make walking more pleasant, safe, and convenient. In addition, every community needs a defined operational center that is very well linked with other parts of the community. This same principle can be translated on a smaller scale to a neighborhood level. Neighborhoods that include a greater mix of land uses within reasonable proximity not only have greater choice of travel alternatives, they a lso afford residents greate r convenience in meeting daily needs This translates into a higher quality of life. Unfortunately, many communities allow for development of large residential subdivisions, and then focus goods and services onto strips along arterials and highways. This forces residents to make more trips longer trips, and gradually increases traffic congestion. These development decisions preclude transir and walking and generally make travel less convenient. For example, people may have to drive even where they live w i thin walking distance of their destination due to the absence or inadequacy of pedestrian crossings and sidewalks. By magnifying demands on the arterial system, this also increases the need for costly road widening and renovations -actions that burden taxpayers and can harm homes businesses, and community character PART /1: LONG-TERM STRATEGIES
PENSACOLA URJIANIZED AR-1 TRANSIT IMPROVEMENT STRATEGY Tnosit and Community Cbancter Transit reinforces many of the desirable aspects of commwtity life such as proximity, diversity, and compact scale. Many of the places people love are places, like downtown Pensaco la, where they can also wal.k and meet and interact with their envirorunent outside of an automobile. For this to occur an area must offer a mix of land uses and services. Mixed-use centers reduce the need for strip commercial development along major roadways and provide better transit destinations. Streets are an essential determinant of what makes commwtities fwtctional, vibrant, and beautiful. The benefits of streets to comrnwtity character relate to street layout, design, and street width. Smaller street sections foster a sense of place. Yet street sections have gradually gotten wider, resulting in loss of any sense of place. Heavily travelled arterials divide rather than integrate a neighborhood, and also discourage pedestrian activity. Unfortunately, community design considerations are frequently missing from the transportation and development planning process. The need for proximity and integration of related land uses has often been overlooked. Although zoning is valuable for separating incompatible land uses, if these concepts are taken to an extreme the result will be homogenous and wtinteresting neighborhoods. Design, layout, and landscaping are also essential components of th e development process. Urban design principles and zoning can be used to integrate land uses in a complementary way, while avoiding conflicts between residential and non-residential land uses. Land Use, Transit, and the Elderly Retirees are a growing segment of Florida's population, and the Pensacola area is gaining as a retirement destination. Most retirees, upon choosing a retirement location desire to age in place. Many also desire relatively low maintenance living-that is, smaller homes and low (or no) maintenance yards. And above all, Americans want to remain independent as they age and to meet their daily needs with minimum assistance. Therefore, proximity to shopping, passive as well as active recreation, and services-including health care and emergency services-are crucial. Some retirees also enjoy engaging in community activity, and benefit from easy access to urban areas. CHAPTER 10: LAND USE AND ACTIVITY CENTER STRATEGIES
CHAPTER JO: J.AN() USE AND ACTIVITY CENTER STRATEGIES Retirees, like most Floridians depend largely on their automobile for transportation. But what will happen if advancing age makes it difficult or unsafe to drive? Safe and convenient public transportation is essential if older Americans are to remain independent as they age. A balanced approach to land development is also needed; one that requires neighborhood and community services within reasonable proximity of residential areas. Florida's low density residential areas are seldom designed with public transportation or walking in mind and often it becomes cos t prohibitive to serve them with public transportation. This reinforces dependence on the automobile and fails to assure the mobility and accessibility that are essential to an active, independent lifeStyle. PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS Define the transit planning area. Most people will walk anywhere from 5 to 15 minutes to get to or from a transit stop. This corresponds to about a one-quarter mile r ad ius containing I 25 acres. This radius defines the transit planning area and should receive special attention in the local planning and development review process. Of course, typical walking distance will vary across different regions in relation to terrain climate, safety, and other issues. Designate strategic transit corridors. Due to changes in ridership or service needs bus routes are subject to change. This can make it difficult to pin down the transit planning area. However, better co ordination of land use decisions with existing service areas can minimize this problem. In addition, every transit system has certain stable routes that are the foundation of the regional system. These should be identified and designated as the regional strategic transit corridors to facilitate coordination on land use decisions. The plan should also identify areas for future expans ion of the transit system or fledgling routes that offer opportunities for future expansion. For example, the Blue Angel Express Route (#18) that runs from the airport to the Pensacola Naval Air Station, is currently ranked last in productivity However, t his should change in the future with the construction of a Nava l Tra ining Center at Chevalier Field. Identify transit-compatible land uses. These are land uses that tend to generate additional transit ridership and which therefore should be strong ly encouraged to locate along transit corridors. Examples include educational institutions, hospitals regional malls, shopping centers, government agencies regional parks, higher density housing, and office districts (Table 30). PART II: LONG-TERM STRATEGIES
PENSACOLA URBANIZED AREA TRANSIT IMPROVEMENT STRATEGY Table 30 Land Usetrransit Compatibillly Matrix .. sul>uiban Parjc ; '. Land Uae/Tranait Urban Regional TiiWn0r < stngie, uH ' Compatibility Malrix Center Hub Village : .o .. lrlct .. Mu.IIJ.uae ... H ;Ana: Rille;; Center Office 0 Suburban Office Local SeNices 0 0 0 0 0 0 Medica l Offices 0 0 0 0 0 0 Hospitals 0 Hotels/Motels 0 0 0 0 0 Movie Theaters 0 0 0 0 0 0 Restaurants 0 0 0 0 0 0 LOQI Center 0 0 0 Reg. Shopping Center Convenience Retaa 0 0 0 0 0 0 Gym/Health Club 0 0 0 0 0 0 Resident i a l 0 7 Ous/aete 0 0 0 7 15 Ou.slacre 0 15. 2 4 Oustacre 24 Units + per aae Regiona l Recreational 0 C ultur a l Facilities 0 Day care Centers 0 0 0 0 0 0 Government Ageneies 0 Other 0 Manufaduring 0 0 0 0 Auto Repair/Service 0 0 0 0 0 Compatible as a Primary Us e 0 Compatible as a SUpporting Use Source: NJTransiC, "Planning for Land Use : A Handbook for New Jersey Commu nnts,"' 1994 CHAPTER 10: LAND USE AND ACTIVITY CENTER STRATEGIES
CHAPTER 10: LAND USE AND ACTIVITY CENTER STRATEGIES Establish a transit service area boundary. Urban service areas are used to defme the geographic limits for extending urban services, utilities and infrastructure. metropolitan areas can avoid premature extension of services into outlying In this way, areas and the corresponding burden on area taxpayers from subsidizing such development. In tum,govemments may focus services into areas where development is desired. The location of infrastructure and public services is a powerful determinant of growth patterns and thus is among the most effective economic development and growth management tools available to local governments. This technique could be used to circumscribe and reinforce the transit service area. The urban service area boundary could be expanded in the future to accommodate additional demand. Tailor the planning and regulatory program to encourage transit compatible development along strategic transit corridors. This can be achieved in land use planning and zoning by designating nodes or activity centers along key transit corridors for mixed use at relatively higher densities and intensities of development and transit-friendly design. In addition, capital improvements plans and programs should select transit accessible locations for all future public buildings, including neighborhood schools and other educational institutions. Coordination efforts should include private developers, as well as school districts, government agencies, and nonprofit organizations that benefit from transit service. Other techniques include checklists or performance criteria that provide incentives, such as transportation impact fee credits or reduced parking requirements, for projects that locate along transit routes (see Table 31: Checklist How Transit Friendly is Your Development Program?). Adopt goals, objectives, and policies that support transit. Florida's planning legislation requires local governments in metropolitan areas to prepare a transit element and to include transit supportive policies in the local comprehensive plan. The City of Pensacola and Escambia County have each addressed the minimum requirements of 9J-5 related to transit. Plan goals, objectives and policies should also support better integration of transit into the land development process to provide a foundation for future coordination when opportunities arise (see Appendix G: Sample Goals, Objectives and Policies that Support Transit). PART 11: LONG-TERM STRATEGIES
PENSACOLA URBANIZED AREA TRANSIT IMPROVEMENT STRATEGY Table 31 Checklist: How Transit Friendly is Your Development Program? 1. Does your local comprehensive plan include goals and policies that support transit use or transit-friendly development patterns? 2. Are incentives offered to developers, such as density bonuses or parking reduction, to encourage transit-friendly development? 3. Does your local land development code include any of the following mechanisms that could be used to support transit? Spe<:ial Districts Overlay Zones Planned Unit Developments Traditiona l Neighborhood Developments Transit Oriented Developments 4. Are the areas surrounding transit stops a nd stations accessible and attractive to pedestrians? 5. Are large single use zones discouraged? 6. Are retail and service uses encouraged on the lower levels of buildings in activity centers? 7. Are a mix of la nd uses, including residen tial, commercial, and retail, encouraged within walking distance of transit facilities? 8. Are relatively higher densities requ ired in activity centers or near transit facilities? 9. Are densities near transit facilities sufficient to support transit use? 10 Does your community encourage continuous sidewalks that radiate from the downtown to outlying districts? 11. Are developers encouraged to cluster buildings near transit facilities or near each other? 12. Are direct pedestrian paths provided between buildings and transit stops? 13 Are bui ld ings in activity centers encouraged to locate near the street l i ne? 14 Are larger developments or redevelopments encouraged to conform to existing block patterns? 15. Are s hort blocks and sidewalks encouraged? 16. Are subdivisions encouraged to interconnect based on an overall street networ1<, with dead end roads and cui-de-sacs kept to a minimum? 17 Are parking requirements reduced or shared parking p rovided for uses served by transit? 18. Are surface parking lots encouraged at the side or rear rather than front lo t lines? 19. Are development sites adjacent to a planned or existing transit facility designated for transit compat i ble uses, densities a nd designs? 20. Are tra nsit access and transit-friendly design addressed during site plan review? Source : NJTransit "Planning lor Transit-Friendly Land Use: A Handbook lor New J e rsey Communities," 1994. CHAPTER 10: LAND USE AND ACTIVITY CENTER STRATEGIES
CHAPTER 10: LAND USE AND ACTIVITY CENTER STRATEGIES LAND USE STRATEGIES Designate and reinforce mi xed-use activity eenters. Every community needs defined operational centers that are very well linked with other partS of the community. Mixed-use centers are also transit dest inat ions. However, simply mixing uses is not enough. A successful mixeduse d evelopmen t is one that enables most of its internal circulation to take place on foot. This requires smaller blocks with pedestrian ways or sidewalks. Use s must also be complementary and functionally related. An area with offices, for example would benefit from restaurants, day c are, dry cleaners or other services within walking distance Avoid segregation of mixed-use developments into separate residential, retail, and office districts. More separate trips are necessary in this scenario. Establish limils to commercial strips. Unlike urban downtowns or activity centers, commercial strips are rarely designed for pedestrians or transit. Commercial corridors, residential areas, and office parks are frequently sealed off from each other with walls, ditches, loading docks and a host of other barriers-including the heavily traveled arterials that serve them. Minimize strip commercial zon ing along arterials and in stead e ncourag e centering" of commercial and office uses. This will help preserve the safety and efficiency of travel on the arterial system for transit and automobiles. Discourage large single-use land areas. Many Florida communities are characterized by large expanses of residential development served primarily by commercial corrido rs This trend increases traffic congestion, exaggerates segregation of residential and nonresidential activity and makes it less convenient to access needed neighborhood facilities and services. This development pattern also limits choice of travel alternatives, making it essential for residents to travel by automobile-even for short d istanc es. From a social perspective, this increases the isolation of senior citizens, children, and persons with disabilities that are unable or unwilling to drive. Other faetors to consider. People will be more l ikely to use transit service where the following facto rs are present: I) Transit stations or stops that: are within reasonable proximity to major points of origin or destination; PART /1: LONG-TERM STRATEGIES
. PENSACOLA URBANIZED AR TRANSIT /MPROVEME1VT STRATEGY have continuous pedestrian access via sidewalks or pathways; have bicycle access or storage facilities; provide clean, visible, well lit, and comfortable places to wait; use open space and other techniques to define major transfer points as focal points for the commwtity, neighborhood, or district. For example, a well-designed transfer point could be strategically located in downtown Pensacola. 2) A mix of land uses, such as office, retail, residential, governmental offices, schools, health care, or recreational locations. 3) Availability of essential services within close proximity of transit stations and park and ride lots to facilitate "trip linking". These might include dry cleaning, day care, drug stores, and so on. 4) Active, well lit areas where people are encouraged to walk and visit and that afford a sense of safety and security. REGULATORY AND DESIGN STRATEGIES Allow a finer mix of land uses. Allow residential blocks to abut commercial streets, with appropriate buffering. Mix offices with stores, shops and hotels. And require buildings within downtown areas or activity centers to provide retail and service uses on the ground floor, while allowing for office or residential uses on upper floors (see Figure 54). This organization promotes transit and walking and allows the traveller to accomplish a greater variety of tasks in fewer trips. Encourage greater connectivity of streets and sidewalks. Street systems have become less connected and more random than the grid or modified grid networks that were typical of past de v elopment styles. Blocks have become lo nger, making walking much less convenient. Many mixed use projects have focused on internal organization while neglecting the need for connectivity with the surrounding street system. Streets wind more and have fewer connections or intersections. And pedestrian and bicycle paths are too often designed solely for exercise or recreation, doing little to enhance accessibility. SmaUer blocks and a ba lanced connected networ k of streets and sidewalks will make an area more pedestrian, bicycle, and transit friendly. CHAPTER 10: LAND USE AND ACTIVITY CENTER STRATEGIES
CHAPTER 10: LAND USE AND ACnYlTY CENTER STRATEGIES r ( !..Q Tt RESIDENTIAL RESIDENTIAL OFFICE MEDICAL OFFICE GOVERNMENT OFFICE Figure 5 4 Vertical M ixing :r GROUND FLOOR RETAIL Encourage Mixed Use RESIDENTIAL RESIDENTIAL RESIDENTIAL RETAI L V ertica l m ixing of land use promo t ea pedestrian activity i "" Source: New Jersey Transi t Plsnning for TransitFrien
PENSACOLA URBANIZED AREA TRANSIT IMPROVEMENT STRATEGY Table 32 Land Use and Density Guidelines for Transit Residential Usa Comniarclal Use Transportation.-com.,.tlblllty 15 to 24+ Units/Acre 150+ Employees/Acre Supports rail or other high capacity service. 7+ Units/Acre 40+ Employees/Acre Supports local bus service. 1-6 Units/Acre 2+ Employees/Acre Supports cars, car pools and vanpools. Source: NJTransit "Planning for Transit-Friendly Land Use: A Handbook for New Jersey Communities," 1994. Figure 55 Redevelop Parking Areas to Increase Density Before After Source: R. Cervero, Llt'lking Land Use and Trsnspoltation. Lincoln Institute of land Policy, (seminar handout), Atlanta, Geotgia 1993 CHAPTER 10: LAND USE AND ACTIVITY CENTER STRATEGIES
CHAPTER 10: LAND USE AND ACTIVITY CENTER STRATEGIES Mix housing types in transit service areas. Offset single family housing in transit service areas with opportunities for housing of different densities, types, and designs. L9cate apartments on or near streets with a higher functional classification (arterials, collectors, or subcollectors) and in proximity of transit stops. One way to avoid conflicts between singlefamily and multiple family housing is to discourage large, homogenous apartment complexes Instead require apartments to be varied in size, density, and design with attention to the quality of the building facade. Apartments could be dispersed across various infill sites with strict attention to compatibility with the surrounding area. clustered development near the street line for better transit access. Suburban office parks, educational institutions, shopping centers, and government buildings are often surrounded by parking areas with transit stops in distant locations. A better alternative is to cluster some of the buildings around a transit accessible t urnaround (see Figure 56), similar to that accomplished at the Pensacola Junior College. Buildings should be encouraged to locate at the street line, with parking in the rear and allowances for reduction in parking spaces (see Figure 57). Although most readily accomplished in projects under the same development plan, this can also be achieved in independent developments by a combination of design standards cluster zoning, and transit access requirements. Regulate transit access in commercial or office districts and adopt bus stop spacing standards. Well designed transit access not only facilitates transit service, it also removes transit vehicles from through traffic for passenger pick-up and drop off. Standards governing design and provision of transit turnout bays, turning radii for cui-de-sacs, and spacing of bus stops should be adopted into the local regulatory program (see Figure 58). Typical spacing standards are Ill Oth of a mile per bus stop. Shelters are provided at key high activity stops. Link transit stops to subdivisions with pedestrian pathways and encourage direct routes or loop roads rather than cui-de sacs for subdivision access. Minor changes in subd ivi sion layout can greatly enhance the convenience of transit use. Fragmented local access streets and cui-de sacs result in twisting routes and longer travel times, thereby discouraging ridersh .ip. Direct routes and loop roads through subdivisions help reduce headways and attract riders (see Figure 59). The same is true of pedestrian access to bus stops from residential subdivisions. Pedestrian pathways should be coordinated with bus stops in design of residential subdivisions PART 1/: LONG-TERM STRATEGIES
PENSACOLA TRANSIT IMPROVEMENT STRATEGY (see Figure 60). Minor changes in subdivision layout can also shorten actual and perceived walking distances, thereby promoting transit use (see F igu re 61). Figure 56 Encourage Clustering of Buildings ..... ......... Prefen'ed IX.t.rttt.et S:ttbWbln. CCfl'\lt'lf'tt' deuefopmel\ts. $UI'T'OW'\ded CW$ren!d c::ommerriOJ det.lelopmel\18 wWt redt.fet'd parid.llg Met dts14nt.from cwLO ust OUt.'J' IJ'(UU!t use tnzr\.$tl srCIP$. thl! of trwuit. SOurce: Nt'w Jets.ey Transit. P#altnlng for Tra.nsit-Friftndly Land Use: A Handbook for New Jtf'SlJY COmmunities. June 199-4. Figure 57 Require Parking at the Side or Rear of Buildings ...... ....... : a I Buildings sepamled from strut by parking Parking building Source: uroan Trsns11 Authority of 8nash Colu mb-a. Guldetrnes for Public (T$nsir in Sms.N Commun;t;es. Small Community Systems. 19$0.
Source: Figure 58 Standards for Design of Bu s Turnouts ---------------------LOCAL STREET rlOO' O!!SLAA8LL SO MIN -' ((20 >tPH) -------------------------------lf(ll 1 0 ttAI.f MJNOR ARtt'RIAL (20 -30 MPH) MAJOR ARTERlAL ()30 MPH ) TIJRNOl/T BAY ""'"""' + + -PlATE 1'<0. 4 L :f I I I us IVllll4..) -.. -... ... ... ... + Maryland Departme nt of Transportation, Mass Transit Administration Dflsign : Trans;(s Ro/6 in Land Development A D6velopers ManuiJ.I. 1988
Figu r e 59 Trans it Access in Residential S ubdivi s i ons Culdesa c routes .J-\_-:........:;-8 Poor transit access a -- L I I' H I \fJ I I I I o. D b C) D ? l 011 ..,.,r-.-rfi ,t; ,J '-II I J! I 0 ;: I X . n =e. ---. ... .... Loop r oa d Improved transit a ccess E3 1 acre So urce: R CIM HO, l.ittJcing U nd Us. a nd Ttanapotflt.ion. Lincol n lnSlitut:e of land Polley. (seminar h:al"dout). Atlanta. Georgia. 1993.
Figure 60 Coordinate Pedestrian Access wilh Bus Stops Not Desirable Walls, berms, or steep slopes bdwttrt bus stops and building may prohibit transit USNc T f8n$it;, Sma communmes. Small Community systems Brandl. Ulban Transit Authority of British Columbia. 1980.
PENSACOLA URBANIZED AREA TRANSIT IMPROVEMENT STRATEGY Adopt a traditional neighborhood development (TND) or transit-oriented development (TOD) floating zone. neighborhood developments (lNO). are a design concept created by Andres Ouany and Elizabeth Plater-Zyberk that can be used for a neighborhood or planned community. This approach encompasses all of the characteristics of transit and pedestrian-friendly lan d use design and is highly compatible with transit service. In addition, some of these design techniques can be used to promote downtown and neighborhood revitalization. Transit-oriented development (TOO) is a design concept similar to TNOs which was developed by Peter Calthorpe. This approach coordinates pedestrian access with transit service while achieving a mix of land uses and residential densities and is especially useful for development around transit stations and major transfer areas. The TOO concept incorporates the one-quarter mile radius of the transit service area and focuses des ign efforts within this radius. It also provides for a gradation of densities with higher densities in and around the transit stop and lower densities further out (see Figure 62). Figure 62 Transit-Oriented Development (TOD) Arterial Core Commerctal omce;Employment Source: County of Sacramento. Planning and Community Development Department. CHAPTER 10: LAND USE At'iD ACTIVITY CENTER STRATEGIES
CHAPTER 10: LAND USE ANJJ ACTIVITY CENTER STRATEGIES Consider establishing a transit overlay zone. Transit-friendly design can also be accomplished through an overlay zone Overlay zones add additional requirements onto an existing zoning district or districts. This approach is useful in avoiding problems associated with a major rezoning, while achieving stated public objectives by modifying or replacing land use and design provisions in the existing zoning district. A transit overlay zone could be modelled after some of the design concepts of transit oriented developments. For example, the overlay could be about one-quarter mile in diameter, centered around a key transit station and overlay provisions could incorporate the land use, regulatory, and design strategies in this report. Integrate transit into development review. The most fundamental step every community should take in supporting public transportation is to address transit related issues in the development review process. Site plan review should address the adequacy of transit access (entrance radii, turnout bays, lane width, etc.), location of bus stops, and pedestrian connections. This could be aceomplished by adding a reference to transit in the development review requirements, adopting site design standards related to transit and pedestrian access, and applying criteria from a review checklist similar to the sample checklist in this chapter Another technique is to establish thresholds for addressing transit-friendly design. In San Diego County, for example, any project that meets or exceeds a threshold of 50 employees or I 00 trips per day is reviewed for compliance with the county's "mode enhancement" regulations. These regulations promote transit-, bicycle-, and pedestrian-friendly design. Transit-friendly design could also be part of a negotiated development agreement. CONCURRENCY Measure transportation level of service in terms of person trips, and not just vehicle trips. Data on highways and transit measure different things at different scales, preventing comparison across various modes. A broader approach to measuring level of service is needed so planners can e valuate and monitor the total transportation system. The City of Miami, for example evaluates volume to capacity based on the capacity to move people along the corridor. This measure incorporates available seating capacity on the County's bus system For a detailed description see "The Role of Level of Service Standards in Florida's Growth Management Goals" (Center for Urban T ransportation Research 1 993). PART 11: LONG-TERM STRATEGIES
PENSACOLA URJIANIZED AREA TRANSIT IMPROVEMENT STRATEGY Designate major activity centers as transportation concurrency exception areas or transportation concurrency management areas. Activity centers where transit service is provided should be established as transportation concurrency exception areas or transportation concurrency management areas and designated for infill development and redevelopment within the comprehensive plan. This would provide an incentive for projects of varying density and use that are designed to support pedestrians and transit Urban design guidelines should be adopted to assure compatibility with the surrounding neighborhood and to promote development styles that enhance rather than detract from neighborhood character. INTERGOVERNMENTAL COORDINATION Develop formal coordination agreements. Many of the land use strategies described here require some degree of intergovernmental or interagency coordination. School districts, Board of Regents and state, local or federal agencies, for example, determine the location of schools, universities and other public buildings. One step toward better coordination on land use locational decisions would be to formalize agreements for future coordination on these matters. Such agreements would establish each entity's interest and role in facilitating better coordination on transit and land use decisions, and a pledge from each entity of actions to be pursued to further these stated purposes. Develop a coordination procedure with Escambia County Area Transit for transit considerations that arise in the development review process. Local governments should coordinate with ECAT on review of development projects in the transit service area. This will assure that access and location of shelters or stops is adequate and will help promote better coordination of transit and land use in the development process. The appropriate process should be developed through dialogue with ECAT regarding their administrative capacity and desired role. One approach, for example, would be to provide ECA T an opportunity to review and comment upon all site plans, preliminary plats, and proposed rezonings along existing bus routes. In this way, ECA T could identify potential opportunities to improve or add bus stops or related improvements Other transit agenc ies in Florida that have been involved in development review, such as HARTline (Hillsborough Area Regional Transit), report positive results. Developers are frequently willing at his stage to incorporate transit-related amenities such as shelters, sidewalks, bus pads and other improvements into the site design and provide them as a cond iti on of CHAPTER /0: LAND USE AND ACTIVITY CENTER STRATEGIES
CHAPTER 10: LAND USE AND ACTIVITY CENTER STRATEGIES development approval. In addition, larger development proposals outside the existing transit service area could be submined to ECA T for comment. This !llight be accomplished based upon an agreed-upon threshold or other criteria tailored to detect projects that could result in demand for transit service. Although this should already occur with Development of Regional Impact proposals the DRI thresholds may not encompass all projects that require transit service. LOCAL PLANNING AND REGULATORY PROGRAMS Escambia County Status of Planni11g a11d Regulatory Program. Comprehensive planning and growth management are fairly new to Escambia County, whose program has been evol ving under Florida's 1985 growth management requirements. The Escambia County Comprehensive Plan was adopted in I 993 and was found in compliance by the Department of Community Affairs in 1994 The County is currently updating its land deve lopment code in accordance with the new plan and is expected to complete the code update by early 1995. The area south ofTen Mile Road has been subject to zoning since 1988. However, no zoning has yet been adopted for the more sparsely deve l oped reg ion north of Ten Mile Road, which is also outside of the current ECAT service area. Opportunities for Transit-Friendly DevelopmenL The following components of the County's planning and regulatory program present opportunities for transit-friendly development : The future land use classification system includes five mixed-use categories, which c ould be used to accomplish balanced land development patterns. The County is combining this with performance standards and buffer provisions as a method of incorporating greater flexibility into the development process, while protecting neighborhoods from adverse development impacts. A program of phased densities with higher residential densities in and within one-quarter mile of activity center areas, and very low densities (I d.u./15-20 acres) in more rural and outlying PART II: LONG-TERM STRATEGIES
PENSACOLA URBANIZED AR&I TRANSIT IMPROVEMENT STRATEGY areas, and clustering/open space requirements. This is combined with caps on building permits and lot splits. A planned unit development (PUD) provision in the land development code which allows development of planned communities with various land use mixes and more flexibility to achieve creative site design. A bikeway plan to facilitate a countywid e system of bikeways and sidewalks. The draft plan calls for bicycle lanes on all new road construction and resurfac ing projects and five foot wide sidewalks on both sides of all urban roads in new developments or redevelopment within two miles of major pedestrian generators, such as schools, parks, regional shopping centers, major employment centers and mass transit centers. Requirements for connectivity of sidewalks and bikeways appear in the draft land development code. Draft land development regulations include high density residential districts ranging from a maximum of 14 units per acre to 25 units per acre. However. as each of these districts is currently structured, each allows a minimum density of I unit per acre. Therefore, these areas could be developed at substantially lower densities, rather than at a diversity of densities as the categories allow. This issue should be monitored to assure that higher densities arc achieved in transit service areas. Staff has begun to encourage surface parking at the side and rear, rather than front lot lines during development review. The County is encouraging new subdivisions to provide stub-streets for connectivity with adjacent projects in the future, and is exploring regulatory standards to that effect. The County is currently exploring providing water taxis and a downtown trolley together with the City of Pensacola which would provide transportation alternatives for tourists and area residents and provide opportunities for interrnodal connections CHAPTER 10: LAND USE AND ACTIVITY CENTER STRATEGIES
CHAPTER }0: LAND USE AND ACTIVITY CENTER STRATEGIES Barriers to Transit-Friendly Development. The County has no locational criteria or access standards related to transit for use in development and site plan review. Staff are considering adding such requirements into the new Code, but this is still preliminary. The County does not actively discourage large single use areas. For example, large tracts encompassing several hundred acres have been designated for single family residential use. The County currently has no design guidelines or program for encouraging transit-friendly design in activity center areas. The County has no organized program of incentives, such as impac t fee credits, density bonuses transportation concurrency exception areas, or reduction in parking requirements to stimulate transit-friendly design The County currently has no goals, objectives and policies specifically addressing land use strateg i es that support transit and alternative modes of transportation. Overall, the County program allows, but does not actively promote, transit-friendly development. City of Pensacola Status of Planning and Regulatory Program. The City of Pensacola Comprehensive Plan was adopted in I 990 and the City has updated its land development code in accordance with statutory requirements. The City is largely built-out and current attention is focused on downtown development and other redevelopment areas. Opportunities for Transit-Friendly Development: An existing historic urban core that exhibits all of the characteristics of transit friendly development and which remains a transit desti.nation This is being reinforced through PART /1: LONG-TERM STRATEGIES
PENSACOLA URBANIZED AREA TRANSIT IMPROVEMENT STRATEGY designation of downtown as a Community Redevelopment Area and Concurrency Exception Area. The decision to cluster government buildings near each other and within the urban core has helped to promote the area as an urban center and increased accessibility to government buildings for citizens and staff via transit. Mixed use and special districts aimed at preserving the character and quality of the City's historic areas, waterfront, and business districts while allowing for a mix of land uses Housing policies address consideration of accessory dwelling units in certain residential zones, thereby allowing for higher population densities and affordable housing alternatives Recreational policy for coordinating with ECATS on provision of transit service to major recreationa l facilities (Policy 1.2.2, see below) Policy LZ .2: The City will coordinate with Escambia County Transit System to reasonably assure, when feasible, provision of seNice to major recreational facilities (City of Pensacola, Comprehensive Plan, Volume II -Goals, Objectives, and Policies, Traffic Congestion, October 1994). Objectives and policies aimed at accommodating transit, bicycle, and pedestrian considerations in transportation improvement programs and in the site plan review process (Objective 1.4 and related policies, see below). Objective 1.4: The City of Pensacola shall accommodate motorized and non-motorized forms of transportation in the design of transportation improvement projects. Policy 1.4.1: The City shall consider in its design of all future roadway improvements for major arterial streets, the accommodation of bicycle and pedestrian transportation needs where appropriate. CHAPTER /0: LAND USE AND ACTIVITY CENTER STRATEGIES
CHAPTER 10: LAND USE AND ACTIVITY CENTER STRATEGIES Policy 1.4.2.: The City shall endorse a comprehensive bicycle education program m coordination with schools, police, and local government. Policy 1.4.3.: The City will include requirements for provision of sidewalks by developers around future commercial developments to aid in pedestrian transportation needs. Policv 1.4.4.: The City shall continue to provide the joint funding for the mass transit provider to support mass transit through yearly financial contributions as called for in the existing interlocal agreement as it may be amended from time to time. Policy 1.4.5.: The City shall continue to coordinate with the WFRPC and the MPO regarding the promotion of alternative modes of transportation (i.e., ridesharing, mass transit). Policy \.4.6.: The City shall ensure that adequate provisions are made for on-site parking, storage circulation and motorized and non-motorized traffic in the site plan review process pursuant to requirements in the City's Land Development Code (City of Pensacola, Comprehensive Plan Volume II Goals. Objectives, and Policies, Traffic Congestion, October 1994). Sidewalks are required for all commercial buildings on commercial corridors, and the City is applying for ISTEA Enhancement funds to connect sidewalks in newly annexed areas and to improve them in selected neighborhoods. The City of Pensacola is currently exploring providing water taxis and a downtown trolley together with the County which would provide transportation alternatives for tourists and area residents and opportunities for interrnodal connections. Barriers to Transit-Friendly Development: The City has no specific locational criteria, access standards or site plan review requirements related to transit in its Land Development Code. PART /1: LONG-TERM STRATEGII!S
PENSACOLA URBANIZED AREA TRANSIT IMPROVEMENT STRATEGY T he City currently has no design guidelines or program for encouraging transit-friendly design in redevelopment areas. The City has no organized program of incentives, such as impact fee credits, density bonuses, or reduction in parking requirements, to stimulate transit-friendly design. The City has no goals, objectives and policies specifically addressing land use s trategies that support transit and alternative modes of transportation. Overall, the City program allows but does not promote transit-friendly development. REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT INITIATIVES Below is a brief review of major projects that are planned, proposed, or underway in the Pensacola Urbani zed Area that have implications for the reg i onal transit system. Naval Air Technical Training Center: Plans are underway for a new naval training center at the Pensacola Naval Air Station by FY 96-97 The training center will be located at Chevalier Field and is expected to serve approximately 4,150 students at any given time with a total of 17,000 students annually. The average time in training is about twelve weeks with courses varying from six to 27 weeks. Of the 4,150 students the majority are enlisted personn e l. A demographic profile of these students indicates that only about 25 percent bring cars. T his area is currently served by the regional bus system and the training center is expected to re i nforce thi s service area with additional ridership. Expansion of Marcus Point Industrial Park. First Data Corporation has announced plans to locate a major facility in Marc u s Point Industrial Park, which i s expected to bring approximately 1,000 new jobs to the region. Many of these employees will be back office support personnel. Two other businesses will also be locating in the park. The area is not directly served by transit, but it would be beneficial to explore such service in the future. Milestone. Milestone is a $50 million mixed use project proposed for northwest Escambia County, in the Pine Forest area. It is expected to accommodate 800 or more residents and CHAPTER 10: LAND USE AND ACTIVITY CENTER STRATEGIES
CHAPTER )0: LAND USE AND ACTIVITY CENTER STRATEGIES housing of various dens it ies ranging in price from $60 000 to $400,000 Designed as a neotraditional community, the project will also include a 200,000-square foot shopping center walking/bicycle paths, offices and commercial uses, and recreational areas Buildout is planned for 1999. Although the community is not served by transit, it is a model of transit-friendly, pedestrian-oriented development. T herefore it may be appropriate to link it with other area activity centers in the future The Pine Forest area is also viewed as the next growth area of the County, and if Milestone is realized it will stimulate additional growth. This provides an opportunity to encourage growth in this region in accordance with guidelines for transit-friendly development and thereby increase the potential for conv e nient public transportation and the character of the built environment for area residents. CONCLUSION The land use and activity center strategies described above are all ways that local governments can support regional transit service, reduce traffic congestion, and even enhance community character. Clearly, every community could benefit from greater coordination on these issues. One way to begin the process is through dialogue among elected officials school boards transit providers, and others involved in the development process to ra i se awareness and explore opportunities for collaboration I n addition, the public sh o uld be informed of these initiatives in advance of any land use or regulatory changes through community education or outreach programs. T his should include civic groups, area businesses and community leaders, as well as interested citizens. Explain measures that prevent adverse impacts on existing neighborhoods and incentives that help businesses. Demonstrate how the proposed changes will improve development outcomes and advance economic development goa l s. Adequate public involvement will help offset the controversy that frequently surrounds land use or regulatory changes and build community support for greater coordination on these issue s PART II: LONG TERM STRATEGIES
This is a blank page
APPENDICES APPENDICES Appendix A: ECAT On-Board Survey Instrument Appendix B: Individual Route Profiles Appendix C: ECAT Operator Survey Appendix D: Interview Questions Appendix E: Escambia County Census Tracts: Distributions and Scores Appendix F: Legislation Related to Regional Transportation Authorities Appendix G: Sample Goals, Objectives, and Policies that Support Transit Appendix H: Sources of Additional Information APPENDICES
This is a blank page
ESCA MBIA COU NTY AREA TRANSIT SYSTEM (ECAT) RIDER SUR VEY DEAR BUS RIDER : !'lease lake a minule lo help us plan for your 1ransi1 needs by completin g lht following survey. Plac-e the survey in the collection box as you exit the bus. or hand it to the: pc:rson who gave it t o you. Please fill out this survey if you filled one ou t earlier. I. Is obis ohe fino urvey you have filled oul loday? 1 Yes z No 2 Where did you Slllt lhis trip ? Home Ooccori'Dentist 1 Other Wor1< Shopping/Emnds Sc:hool VisilingfRecrcadon 2L lslhis in ohc cit y limils ? 1 _Yes No 3 What is ohe location of ohc place you are coming from? ______ __ ( .....,..,..,..,._, 4 Where did you get on this bus? & _______ (WUU thai 'Mrntct ntllt:St tht bus SIIOp) 4a. Is lhis in the city limits? 1 Yes No 5 How did you get to lhc bus slop? (-I only one) Walked 0 blocks o T ransferred from aoother bus z Walked more than 3 blocks from Route H _ Was dropped off Drive Ooher 6 Where will you gel otTo his bus? &---..,-----(streets th11t intersect nearest the bus 7 What will you do when you ge l off this bus? (-I only one) Walk 0 blocks Transfer to anolher bus 1 \Yolk more ohan 3 blocks lo Route # > Be picked up Drive Ooher 8 Where are you going 10 now? Home Ooctor/Denlist r Other Work s Shopping/Errands School Visiting/Recreation 9 What is the locaoion of the place you arc goinglo ? .&: ___________ (Mamt SUUI iftterstctioa) 9a Is this in the city limits? 1 Yes 10. Which fare category are you in? Yoolh Regular Aduh o Senior Disabled II. How did you pay for your fare on lhis bus? No Cash 2c>-trip Commuocr Ticket Monthl y Pass Transfer Weekly Pass Other 12. How often do you ride lhe bus? 1 4 or more days per week 2 or 3 days per week 1 About I day per week Once every_weeb 13. What is the most importanl reason you ride ohe bus? (.J o n ly one ) I don t drive > Park. ing is difficulllc:ostly 1 Car is not available Bus is more convenient -, Bus is more economicl l r 4 Traffic is too bad (spify) 14. How would you make lhis trip if not by bus? Drive _Walk Ride witb someone s Taxi > Bicycl e t Wouldn't make trip 15. How long have you been using ECAT s
19. Your total annual household income is .. _less than $10,000 $20,000 to $24,999 SlO,OOO to $14,999 $25,000 to $29,999 SlS,OOO to $19 999 $30,000 and over 20. How many cars are owned by your holi$C:bold? None 2 One Two Three or more Complete as much as possible, but please tum in questionnaire even if you have not finished. 21. Please answer the following questions by placing a cheok(.J) in the appropriate column. In general, how do you rate each of the following aspeGIS of ECAT service: a. Days of service b Hours of service c. Fn.oquency of service (how often buses run) d. Convenience of routes (where buses go) e. Dependability of buses (on time) f. TraveJ time on bus 0 Cos t of riding t he bus h. Availability of b u s route information i. Vehicle -cleanliness and c.omfort j. Operacor courtesy k Safety on bus and at bus stops __ I. How would YOU rate overall bus service Very Good Good Fair Poor Very Poor 22. If you could make only ONE improvement to the bus system, what would it be? Comments & Suggest THANK YOU FOR YOUR COOPERATION. PLEASE PLACE IN RETURN BOX ON BUS OR RETURN TO DRIVER. If you have any additional comments or questions call 436-9383. o n s
This is a blank page
DEMOGRAPIDCS 17 ynrs or under 18 to 24 years 35 to 44 years 4 5 to 54 yean Age Female 76'1(, MAl 25% African-American .. 9% Route 1 An n ual Hous e hold Incom e $20 ,000 to $24 999 20 % 30% 4 0% None Ethn i c Origin One 31% Three or more 2% A uto Ownersh i p APPE NDIX B: INDIVIDUAL ROUTE PROFILES
TRAVEL BEHAVIOR Trip Origin Work tO% School Home 71% 10% 2% Shop/Errands 8% Other Walked 0-3 blocks 59% Trip Destination Shop/Err:mds 25% School 16% Other 10% Modes of Access/ Egress Walked over 3 blocks 16% Dropped off/ picked up 5% Transferred from/to another bus By automobile 15% 6% USER SATISFACTION Vc<)'Good Good Fair Poor Vtry Vety Cood Good Fair Poor Very Poor : Week
DEMOGRAPIDCS 17 years o r unde r 18 to 24 years Age Route 2 Annua l Household Income Less than 510,000 S!O,OOO to $14,999 SIS,OOO to $19,999 $ 20, 000 to $24,999 $25, 000 to $2 9,999 $30 ,000 and o v e r 30% F e mal e S"-African American 65% Gender Ethnic Origin 1!!----l---l----l 0% None 65'11. Auto Ownen h i p Wrute33% 26% APPENDIX B : I N DJIIID UAL R OUTE PROFILES
1RA VEL BEHAVIOR Trip Origin Work26% HomeS?% Schooll% Shop/Errands 8% Other 5% Walked 0.3 blocks 51'!1. Other 6% Trip Destination Schoo l 8% Shop/Ernnds 28% Home 39% Other 7% Walked over 3 blocks 18% Modes o f Access/ E g ress D r o pped off / picked up 3% Transferred from/to another bus: 22% USER SATISFACTION V ery Good Good Pair Poo. Very Poor Very Good Good F&ir Poor Weekday H ours of Se rvice Con v eni e nce of Routes Poor 1:.;;:..,_+--+----1---i APPENDIX 8 : I NDIVIDUAL R OUTE PROFILES Frequency of Service Overall ECAT S ervice
DEMOGRAPIDCS 17 years or under 18 65 years o r more Age Route 3 Annual H ouseho ld lncorne Less than SIO,OOO SIO,OOO to 514,999 $15,000 to 519,999 $20,000 to 524 ,999 $25,000 to $29,999 $30,000 and over 20'11. Female 84'!1. African-American 71% 80'11. None 49'!1. Gender Ethnic Origin One 24% Auto Ownership Male 16% White 26% Three or more 12'!1. A PPENDIX B: INDWTDUAL ROUT P ROFILES
TRAVEL BEHAVIOR Trip Origin Work 20% Home 55% School 15% Shop/Errands 10% Walked 0-3 blocks 57% Transferred from/
DEMOGRAPIDCS V yean or under 1 8 to24 y..,.. 25 to 34 years 35 t o 44 years 45to 54 yean 55 to 60 years 60 to 65 years 65 yean or more Age Route 4 Annual Hou n hold I ncome leiS than $10,000 $10,000 to $14 ,999 sts,ooo to S19,999 $20,000 lO $24,999 $ 25,000 to $29 ,999 $30 ,000 and over Female 63% Afri canAm ericon 78% Eth n ic Origin Male 37% WIUte 1.7'!to One20% Two7'!to Three or more 5% A u to Ownersh i p APPENDIX B: INDIVIDUAL ROU TE PROFILES
TRAVEL BEHAVIOR Trip Origin Schoo l Work 6% 16% Home 52% Shop/Er r ands 12% Other 13% Walked 0-3 blocks 54% Other 1% Trip Destination School 6% Work 14% Shop/Errands 20% Other 11% Home 49% Modes of Access/ Egress Walked ove r 3 blocks 21% Dropped off/picked up 1% Transferred from/to another bus 23% USER SATISFACTION Good Fair Poor Very Poor Very Good Good Weekday Hours of Service Convenience of Routes APPENDIX 8: INDIVI DUAL ROUTE PROFILES Frequency of Service Overall ECA T Service
DEMOGRAPIDCS 17 yw. or under 18 to 24 years 25 to 34 years 45 to 54 years 55 to 60 years Age Route 5 Annual Household Income SJo.ooo and over 40% Femal e 57')(, Gender African-American 59% None 61% Ethnic Origin One 24% .Two 13% Three or more 3% Auto Ownership APPENDIX 8: I N DIVIDUAL R OUTE P ROFILES
TRAVEL BEHAVIOR Trip Origin Work 8 % Home 65% School 12% 6% Shop/Errands 8% Other Walked ().3 blocks 64% Trip Destination School 13% Shop/Errands 19% Other 9% Home 38% Modes of Access/ Egress Walked over 3 bl ocks 14% Other 1% Dropped off/picked up 4% By automobile 1% Transferred from/to another bus 15% USER SATISFACTION Vuy Good Good Fair P oo Vry Poor VtryGood Good Poor Weekday H ours of Service Convenience of Routes Very Poor F--1-+--+--l APPENDIX B: I NDIVIDUAL ROUT E PROFILES Frequency of Service Overall ECA T Service
DEMOGRAPIDCS 17 yean or under 18 to 2 4 ytan 2S to 3 4 yean 3Sto+l years 4S to S4 yean SS to 60yean 60 to 65 yeus 6S years or mote Age Route 6 Annual H ou5ebold Income Less than $10,000 510,000 to $14,999 $1S,OOO to $20,000 to S2S,OOO to S29, 999 530,000 and over Fem ale 63% African-American 80% None 75'11. Gender Etbni c Origin Auto Ownenbi p Male 37% White 20% One 18% A PPE/'i DIX B : INDIVIDQ A I. R OUTE PROFILES
TRAVEL BEHAVIOR T ri p Origin u;;y 5% Other A. Trip Destination Shop/Errands 22% School 8% Work V% Walked over 3 blocks II% Other 19% Dropped off/pioked up 2% Modes of A c cess/ Egress Walked ().J blocks B Trmsferred from/to another bus 31% Other7% USER SATISFACTION Very Good Good Fair Poor Poor VryGood Goad Pir Poor Vcty P oor Weekday Hours of Service Conve nience o f Routes APPENDlX B : I N D fi'IDUAL R OUTE PROFILES Frequency of Service Overall ECA T Service
DEMOGRAPIDCS 17 years or under 18 to 24 years 25 to 3 4 year$ 65 y urs or more Age Route 7 A n nual 8 ousehold lnco me $20,000 tO $24,999 $2S,OOO to $29,999 $30,000 and over Female 72% Alrican Ameriean 85% None S8% Gender Ethnic Or igin Male 28% White IS% Two 10% Three or more 4 % Auto Ownership APPE/VDfX B : I NDIVIDUAL R O U T E PROFfLES
TRAVEL BEHAVIOR Tri p O ri gi n Work Ill% Sch oolS% S h o p /Errands 10% Walked().) blocks 5 4 % Other7% T r ip D es tin a ti o n School Work 41% ISCX. Walk e d over 3 blocks 1 2 % Shop/Ernnds IS% Other 5% Dropped off/picked up 1% Modes o f Access / Egr ess Tr.nsf err e d from/to an o t her bus 2 8 % Other By aut omobile 4% 1 % USER SATISFACTION VeryCood Cood P oo < H o urs of Service V ery Poor VeryCood Good Convenie n ce o f R outes FUr Poo, Poor A PPENDIX B : INDIVIDUAL ROU TE P R O FILES Frequency o f S ervi ce Ov e r a U E C AT S ervi ce
DEMOGRAPillCS 17 years or undt.r 18 to 2 4 yean 25 to 34 years JS to 44 years 4 5 to 5 4 y ears 55 t o 60 years 65 years o r more Age Route 9 A n n u a l H o u seho l d Income SJO,OOO and over Female 54% Gende. r Ethnic Origin O n e 39% Two 14% Three o r more None S'JI. Ow nershi p APPE1 VDIX B: INDIVIDUA L R OUTE P R O FILES
TRAVEL BEHAVIOR Trip O ri g in Sehool6% WorkS% Home60% S hop/Errands 13% O t her 13% WalkM 0.3 blocks 63% Other 6% Trip Destination Sch ool Work 48% 13% Shop/Emrnds 17% Other 4% Modes o f Access/ Egress Walked over 3 blocks 17% Droppe d off/ picked up 5% Transferred from/to another bus 11% USER SATISFACTION Very Coocl Good Fair Poor Ve..ry Poor v .,. Good Good Fair Poor V4f.ry Poor Weekday Hours of Service Co n venience o f R outes APPENDIX B : INDIVIDIJAL R OIITE PROFILES Frequency o f Service Overall ECA T S erv ice
DEMOGRAPIDCS 17 yean or under 18 co 24 years 2S co 34 years 65 years or more Age 20% Route lOA Annu a l H o u sehold Income Less than $ 1 0,000 SJO,OOOto $ 14,999 $15,000 co $19,999 $20 ,000 co $24 ,999 $25 ,000 co $ 29,999 SJO,OOO and over 60% Female 57% Afr icanAmttican 85% Gender Et hn ic Origin Auto Ownenhip White IJ% Hispanic 1% None SJ% APPENDI X 8 : INDIVIDUAL ROUTE PROF ILES
TRAVEL BEHAVIOR Trip Origin Work16% Home62% Scbool3% Shop/Errands 13% Other 7% Trip Destination School Work3% 15% Home 57% Shop/Errands II% Other 14% Modes of Access/ Walked 0-3 b locks 59% Egress Walked over 3 b l ocks 17% Dropped off/picked up 4% Transferred from/to a.nother bus Other By automobile 16% 4% 1 % USER SATISFACTION Very Good Good Fair Poor Very Poor Weekday Hours of Service Convenience of Routes APPENDIX B: INDIVIDUAL ROUTE PROFILES Frequency of Service Overall ECAT Service
DEMOGRAPIDCS 17 years or under 1 8 to 24 y ears JS to 44 y..,., 4 S to 54 Ye:ltS 65 years or more A ge Route lOB A nnual House hold Income !As than $ 10,000 SIO,OOO to Sl4,m $ 15,000 to $19,999 $20,000 to $24,999 $25 ,000 to $29,999 S30,000 a.nd over 40% Fe male 57% Gende r African -American 71% Ethnic Origin One )3% White 23% Three or more None 6% 44% Au to Owne r s h ip APPEJVDIX B : [/VDIVTD U A L ROUTE PROFILES
TRAVEL BEllA VIOR Trip Origin Walked 0-3 bloc k s 59% Other 4"4 Trip Destination School Shop/Errands 6"4 16"4 Walked over 3 b lock$ 7% Other 12% Modes o f Access/ Egr ess Dropped off/picked up 8"4 from/to another bus 21% USER SATISFACTION W ee kday H ours of Se rvice Co nvenience o f Routes i .iiii Fr Poor Vc1}' Poor APPENDIX 8 : I NDIV IDUAL R OUT E PROFILES Frequ e ncy of Service Overall ECA T Service
DEMOGRAPIDCS 17 years or und er 18 to 24 yeart 4S 10 S 4 years SS t O 60 y
TRAVEL BEHAVIOR Trip Origin Home60% WalW 1).3 blocks 62% Other 3% T rip Destioation School )% Shop/Erran ds 26% Other 10'10 Hom e 39% Modes of Access/ Egress Walked o....3 bloch 12 % Dropped off/pi c k ed up 3% Tn.nsferred from/to another bus 21% USER SATISFACTION VeryCood CO<>d F'a.ir Poor Poor v,..,. CO<>d Coed FAir P oo, Very Poo r Weekda y Houn of Serv ice Co n vellie n ce of Routes APPNDIX B : INDIVIDUAL ROUT PROFILES Frequency o f Service O verall ECA T Service
DEMOGRAPIDCS 17 years o r under 18 to 2 4 years SSto60years 60 to 65 years 65 ynrs or more Age Route 12 Annual Household Income Less than SIO,OOO $ 10,000 to $14 ,999 SIS ,OOOto S19 999 $ 20 ,000 to $24 ,999 $25,000 to $29 ,999 $30,000 and over 50% Female 5"' None 54% Gender HUpa.aici'% Other7% White62% E t h n ic Origin O ne 25% Thro r more 8% Auto Ownersh i p AI'PENDIX B : I NDIVIDUAL R OUTE P ROFILES
TRAVEL BEHAVIOR Trip Origin Work H% Scbool7% Shop/Erran ds 3% Other7% Trip Destinati o n Shop/ Erran ds 24% School !]'If, Work 2 1 % Other 1 0 % Walked o v e r 3 b locks Walked 0-J blocks .a% Otner 7% 26% M o des of Access/ Egress Dropped off/ picked u p 5% T ransf erred from/t o another buJ 2 2 % USER SATISFACTION YuyGood Good Fnr Poo Very P oo r W ee kday H o urs o f S ervi c e C onvenien ce o f Route s 1m APPE NDIX B: I NDIV I DU AL R OUT PROFIL ES Frequency o f Serv i ce Overall ECA T S ervice
DEMOGRAPIDCS 17 years or un ckr 1Sto24 y ears 65 years or more Age 12% 20% Route 13 30% Annual Hou$ehold Incom e $10 000 tO $15,000 to S19,999 $ 2 0,000 t O $24,999 $30,000 :md over 40% Female 58% Gender Ethnic Origin White 24% Two "' None 56% Three or more 6% Auto Ownel'$hip APPENDTX B : I ND IVID UAL R OUTE PROFILES
TRAVEL BEHAVIOR Trip Origin Work 14'!b School2% Sho p /Ernnds 11% O ther6% Walked 0.3 Blocks 73% Trip Destination Work29% Sch()912% Shop/Ernnds Other9% H ome47% Modes of Access/ Egress Transferred from/ t o o.no t her bU$ 17% Other2% D r opped off/pic ked u p I % Walked over 3 b loc ks 7% USER SATISFACTION Vuy Cood Cood Poo Poo r Vuy Coo
DEMOGRAPIDCS 17 yean or wtckr IS 1 0 2 4 years 2S 10 H years 65 ye-ars ot more A g e 20% 25% Female 68% G e nder Male 33% 01her2% African-Americ:an 56% Route 14 Annual H o usehold I nco m e $2 0,000 10 $24 ,999 S25,000 IO $29,999 $3 0,000 and over 30% 40% SO% Ethnic Orig in 34% Au t o Ownenhi p APPENDIX 8 : I N DIVIDUAL R OUTE P R OFILES
TRAVEL BEHAVIOR Trip Origin School Work 30% 2% Shop/Errands 18% Home 46% Walked 0-3 b l ocks 47% Other S% Other 4% Trip Destination Work 26% Shop/Emnds 21% Home 48% Ocher 5% Walked o v er 3 blocks 24% Modes of Access/ Egress Dropped off/picked up 5% Transferred from/to another bus 21% USER SATISFACTION Poor Very Poor Ve'Y G<>od Good Weekday Hours of Service Convenience ofRoutcs Poor Very Poor APPENDIX B: INDIVIDUAL RoUTE PROFILES Frequency of Service Overall ECAT Service
DEMOGRAPIDCS 35to#yean 4 5 to 54 years 5S to 6tJ years 6tJ to 65 years 6S years or more Age Route 15 Annu a l Household Income SJO,OOO and over Female African-American 64% Gender White30% Ethnic Origin None 56% One33% Two9% Three or more Auto Ownenhip A PPENDlX B: INDIVID UAL R OUTE PROFILES
TRAVEL BEHAVIOR Trip Origin Work20% School6% Shop/Errand$ 8% Home 58% Walked 0-3 b lt>
DEMOGRAPIDCS 17 years or under 18 to 24 yean 2Sto H yean 3S t o yean 4 5 t o 54 yean 5 5
TRAVEL BEHAVIOR Trip Origin School Work 4 % 19% Home Sbop/Urands Other II% Walked 0-3 blo cks 60% Trip Destinati on Shop/Urands 19% Sehool 4 % Other 15% Work24% Home38% Modes of Access/ Egress Walked OVeT J blocks IJ% D r opped off/ picked up S% Transfe r red from/to ano th e r bus O t her By automobile 18% 4% 1% USER SATISFACTION Vtty Poor Very Good Good Weekday Hours of Se rvice Conve nience o f Routes APPENDIX B : I NDIVIDUAL R OUT PROFILES Frequency of Service Overall ECAT Servic e
DEMOGRAPillCS 17 ye.ars or under 18 to 24 years 25toH years 35to44yean A ge Route 18 Annual Household Inco m e Less than SIO,OOO SIO,OOO t o $14 ,999 $15 ,000 IO $19 ,999 $20,000 I O $24 ,999 $25 ,000 to $ 29,999 SJO,OOO and o ver None 58% Gender Hisp;mic 4% Other4% White 52% Ethn i c Origin One 21% Two 17% Three or more 4% Aut o Ownershi p APPENDIX B : I NDIV I DUAL ROUTE PROFILES
TRAVEL BEHAVIOR Trip O r igin Work40% Sehool4% Shop/Errands 8% Other4% Walked over3 blo cks IS% Walked().) blocks 44% Trip Destin a tion WorkH% OtherS% Home46% Modes of Access/ Egress Dropped off/picked up 19'1. T ransferred from/to another bus 13% By automo bile 2% Other7% USER SATISFACTION Very Cood Good FAir p..,, Very Poor Cood Cood p..,, Weekday H ours of Se rvice Convenienoe o f Routes Very Poor APPENDIX B: I NDIVIDUAL ROUTE P ROFILES Frequency o f Service Overall ECA T Service
This is a blank page
This is a blank page
ECAT OPERATOR SURVEY I. The following is a list of possible complaints passengers may voice to bus operators. Please rank the 5 complaints you hear most frequently (1 being the most frequent). fare is too high infrequent service bus doesn't go where I want bus is late bus leaves stop too early bus is not clean bus is not comfonable -need Sunday service 2. What is your opinion of these complaints? Are they va1id? passengers cannot get infonnation bus schedule too hard to understand eating or drinking on the bus smoking on bus route or destination not c lear no bus shelters/benches need evening service _OTHER (specify)------3. The following is a list of possible improvements to the transit system Please rank all the improv ements that you think would be helpful (I most helpful). operate Oe\\', smaller vehicles provide bener route and schedule infonnation maintain buses more frequentJy g ive more time in schedules lower the fares put up shelters at bus stops operate Sunday service reduce headways _OTHER (please specify)-----------------------4 Do you know of any safety problems on any routes? Please describe. 5. Are there any schedules or parts of schedules which are difficult to maintain? _yes no If yes, which routes?------------------------------6. Are there any routes which should be modified in any way? If so, how? 7 In your opinion, is night service necessary? _yes no 8. In your opinion, is Sunday service necessary? _yes no 9. Are there -any other comments that would be helpful ro us? THANKS FOR YOUR HELP!
PENSACOLA URBANIZED AREA TRANSIT IMPROVEMENT STRATEGY Table C-1 Most Frequent Passenger Complaints about ECA T Identified by Bus Operators ECAT Operator Survey Moat Frequent Complaints Wetghtsd Number of Responses Need evening service 48 10 Infrequent service 45 10 Need Sunday service 39 11 Bus doesn't go where I want 37 9 No bus shenerslbenches 28 8 Passengers cannot get information 15 6 Eating or drinking on the bus 14 4 Route/destination not clear 11 4 Bus leaves stop too early 9 4 Bus schedule too hard to. understand 9 3 Smoking on bus 7 3 Fare is too high 7 3 Bus is not comfortable 3 2 Bus is not clean 2 2 Bus is late 2 2 Five points for each first priority ranking, down to one point for fifth priority ranking. APPENDIX C: ECAT OPERATOR SURVEY
APPENDIX C: ECAT OPERAT OR SURV EY Table C-2 Improvement Areas for ECAT Identified by Bus Operators ECA T Operator Survey Improvement Weighted' Number of RespoMes Provide free t ransfers 28 6 Put up shelters at bus stops 27 7 Operate Sunday Service 25 5 Provide better route and schedule i nfo rmation 24 6 Give more t i me in schedules 1 6 4 Operate new, smaller vehicles 14 4 Lower the fares 1 1 4 Maintain buses more frequently 11 3 Reduce headway 6 2 Evening service 5 2 More transfer points 4 1 Run more north/south short runs with north midd le, and south 4 1 loo ps interconnect i ng a ll routes Later service to mall area 4 1 Five points for each firs t priority rank i ng down to one point for fifth priority ranking. APPENDIX C: ECAT OPERATOR SURVEY
PENSACOLA URBANIZED AREA TRANSIT I MPROVEMEN T STRATEGY T a ble C-3 ECA T Safety P r oblem s I den t ified by Bus Operators ECAT Operat o r S u rvey . ' .. .--: ., N .umber: o f Safety P roblem .. Respo nses No safety prob l ems 7 Left tum o u t of Mariner Mall onto Fairfield 1 Red lights set too lOng (no route specified) 1 Ro ute 11 has t oo many stops, forced speedi n g to ma k e run 1 Corry F ield Rd. has no bus stops cars passing bus o n both sides 1 Exiting Mooring Apls. 1 Mall 1 Route 7 A: Stopp i ng on rail r oad t r acks u navoi d a b le due to t r affic 1 t urning fro m Market St. onto M assachusetts Av. Need bus stop s i gn a t comer of B a ylen and Government Sts 1 Tabl e C 4 R outes witb Sc h ed ul e Pro blem s Id enti fied b y Bus Operators ECA T O per a t o r Surv ey D ifficult t o Mai n tai n Numbe r o f Route S c hedules Responses 11 5 16 4 15 ( 1 Saturday only) 3 7A 2 1 2 12 1 9 1 7B 1 A PPENDTX C: ECAT OPERATOR SURVEY
APPENDIX C: ECA T OPERATOR SURVEY Route 11 78 16 12 12 1 Table C-5 ECAT Routes to Modify Identified by Bus Operators ECAT Operator Survey Suggested Modification Need more t i me in schedu le Need more t ime in schedule Need more time in schedule Run every hour Add second Mall run from Rl. 11 and all of lhe Sun Rise Apl. runs Run less often Move rou tes one bloc k north or south of 4-way stops at Blount & 121h Ave, and Cross & 12th Ave. No response Table C 6 Need for Night or Sunday Service No. ldentit)
This is a blank page
APPENDfX D: INTERVIEW QUESTIONS APPENDIX D INTERVIEW QUESTIONS APPENDIX D: INTERVIEW QUESTIONS
. This is a blank page
APPENDIX D: INTERVIEW QUESTIONS INTERVIEW QUESTIONS A. WHERE WE ARE I How much awareness of and support for transit is there in the community? Have the levels of awareness and support changed in the last two years? 2. How is ECA T perceived in the community? What is your perception of transit s role in the community? 3. Is the transit system respons i ve to commun it y needs? How are thos e needs communicated to the transit system? 4 Is information on transit readily available in the community? 5 What is your opinion of the transit fare? 6. Is traffic co ngestion a problem in the Pensacola urbanized area? If so, what role can transit play in alleviating this problem? 7. Is there a parking problem in Pensacola? If so, how does this affect transit's role in the community? 8. What effects have the new buses had on perceptions of the transit s ystem? What about the new transfer center? B. WHERE WE WANT TO GO 9. What goals has the c om munity and elected officials voiced for transit? What do you see as appropriate goals for the transit system? I 0. How can ECAT better meet community needs? II. What is happening in the Pensacola urbanized area tn terms of residential and commercial development? How much? Where? How can transit best respond t o these trends? 1 2. Is the establishment of service guidelines a worthwhile goal for trans i t? 1 3 Should ECA T be look ing at new markets for transit service, o r should it concentrate on its existing markets? 14. Is there a willingness in the community to consider additional local fund in g sources for transit? APPENDIX D: INTERVIEW QUESTIONS
PENSACOLA URBANIZED AREA TRANSIT IMPROVEMENT STRATEGY C. HOW WE GET THERE 15. What improvements are needed in the transit system to attract more riders and meet community goals? 16. Is there a need for park and ride lots possibly in conjunction with express or limited stop bus service? 17. Are there areas currently not served or underserved by transit that should receive a higher priority? 18. Are there other policies that should be changed to help the transit system reach its goals? D SUMMARY 19. What are the major strengths and accomplishments of the transit system? 20. How have perceptions of the transit system changed over the last two years? 21. If you could pick one thing to change about the transit system, what would it be? APPENDIX D: INTERVIEW QUESTIONS
APPENDIX : EsCAMBIA COUNTY CENSUS TRACTS APPENDIX E ESCAMBIA COUNTY CENSUS TRACTS: DISTRIBUTIONS AND SCORES APPENDIX E: EsCAMBIA COUNTY CENSUS TRACTS
This is a blank page
APPENDIX E: EsCAMBIA COUNTY CENSUS TRACTS Table E 1 Esc:am bia Cou n ty Census Tracts: Distributions and Scores Census Pe rcent Percent Percent Composite E lderl y Sco r e Lo w I ncome Sco re 0-Vehicle Score Tract Persons H o useholds Households Score 1.00 9% 1 0 0% 1 0 0% 1 0 3 0 2 00 32% 27.0 43% 3 6 29% 5 5 36 1 3.00 25% 3.0 35% 3 6 21% 3 3 9 9 4 00 28% 3 0 53% 16 0 45% 1 1 0 30 0 5.00 26% 3.0 16% 1 0 15% 3.3 7 3 6 .00 27% 3 0 47% 3 6 40% 1 1 0 17 6 7 .00 1 8% 1.8 42% 3.6 49% 11. 0 16.4 8.00 26% 3.0 27% 3 6 15% 3 3 9.9 9 .00 30% 3.0 12% 1 0 5% 1 0 5 0 10.01 2 1 % 1.8 4% 1.0 1% 1. 0 3 8 1 0.02 19% 1 8 13% 1 0 3% 1. 0 3 8 11.01 16% 1 .0 4% 1.0 1% 1.0 3 0 11.02 16% 1 0 1 0% 1.0 4% 1 0 3 0 12.01 23% 1 8 19% 1 0 1 3% 3 3 6.1 12 02 16% 1 0 21% 1 .0 9% 1 0 3 0 13.00 21% 1.8 24% 3 6 16% 3 3 8 7 14.01 7% 1.0 28% 3 6 27% 5 5 10.1 1 4 .02 1 5% 1 0 1 6% 1 0 9% 1.0 3 0 15.00 25% 3 0 47% 3.6 31% 5.5 12.1 16 .00 26% 3 0 45% 3 6 20% 3 3 9.9 17 .00 15% 1. 0 49% 16 0 26% 5.5 22 5 18 .00 23% 1.8 36% 3 6 23% 3.3 8 7 1 9 .00 23% 1 8 37% 3 6 26% 5.5 10 9 20.00 18% 1.8 31% 3 6 19% 3.3 8 7 (Continued) APPENDIX E: ESCAMBIA COUNTY CENSUS TRACTS
P E NSACOLA URBANIZED A REA TRANSIT IMPROVEMENT STRATEGY T a bl e E1 (Co n tin u ed) C oun ty C ensu s D istributi on s and Pe rcent P e rcent : ' ' Census Col1)poalte E l derly Sco re L o w I ncome Score 'scicin.., Tract Pe rs o n s H o u s eh o lds H ouseholds Scont 21.00 18% 1 8 2 7% 3.6 12% 1.0 6.4 22 .00 19% 1.8 23% 3 6 14% 3 3 8.7 23 ,00 28% 3 0 17% 1.0 8% 1 0 5.0 24 ,00 1% 1.0 0% 1 0 0% 1 0 3.0 24 99 0% 1:0 0% 1 0 0% 1 0 3 0 25 .98 14% 1 0 7% 1.0 1 % 1.0 3.0 26.01 18% 1 8 11% 1.0 1 % 1 0 3.8 26.02 20% 1. 8 6% 1.0 1% 1.0 3.8 27.00 1 2% 1 .0 23% 3.6 1 2% 1.0 5.6 28 .00 1 5% 1 .0 12% 1 0 4% 1.0 3.0 29 .00 22% 1 .8 27% 3.6 7% 1 0 6.4 30.00 17% 1 0 17% 1 0 6% 1 0 3.0 31.00 11% 1 0 19% 1 0 8% 1 .0 3 0 32 .01 1 4 % 1.0 20% 1.0 9% 1.0 3.0 32.02 11% 1.0 10% 1.0 6% 1.0 3.0 33 .01 12% 1.0 12% 1.0 2% 1.0 3 0 33.02 15% 1.0 13% 1 0 5% 1.0 3 0 33.03 9% 1.0 13% 1.0 5% 1.0 3.0 34.00 15% 1.0 19% 1.0 11% 1.0 3 0 35.01 13% 1.0 12% 1.0 6% 1 0 3.0 35.02 1 5% 1.0 16% 1.0 7% 1 0 3.0 36, 01 1 4% 1 0 11% 1.0 3% 1 0 3 0 36.02 11% 1.0 14% 1.0 6% 1.0 3 0 36,03 12% 1.0 12% 1.0 3% 1 0 3.0 37.00 16% 1 0 25% 3.6 14% 3.3 7 .9 38.00 16% 1.0 20% 1 0 8% 1.0 3.0 39.00 18% 1.8 16% 1.0 9% 1.0 3.8 40.00 18% 1.8 41% 3.6 24% 5 5 10.9 APPENDIX E: EsCAMB/A COUNTY CENSUS TRACTS
APPENDIX F: REGIONAL TRANSPORT AnON AUTHORITIES LEGISLATION APPENDIX F LEGISLATION RELATED TO REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITIES APPENDIX F: REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITIES LEGISLATION
This is a blank page
Cll. 163 INTfRGOVERNMEHTAl. PROGRAMS (2) Any coonty or munlclpalily which has authorized the aeation ol a community redevelopment area putsu ant to part 01 otlhis ehapler Is directed to give eonslder at ion to the eteation ot a hood imp rovement dis trict within said atea "'-'f,_, 70, ch. D-243; Cl\. t i M. 163.523 Saf e nelghbo
INTERGOVERNMEHTAL PIIOGRAMS Cl\. 163 c;harter. Tho chal.'"' in lddi..., to t1>e pur s and powers p
Cll.163 INTERGOVERNMENTAL PROGRAMS F.S. 19i3 part is g ranted too authorily to purchase. own, 01 operate, or provide fot the operation ol, transportation faci li ties ; to contract for transit sarvices; to exerclu power of eminent domain limi ted to right--of .. way and contigu cvs llansportalion fac il ity acquis i tion and subject to any further l imitations set forth i n the autl"lor ity charter; to conduct studies; and to contract with other govemmen tal agencies, private companies and ind ividua ls How ever no public lransportation system shall be pur chased. owned, 04" operated that would be in the contin ued business ot competi-ng with existing private charter transportation companies for cl'\arter business, rior shall a new system be where ari existing tfansportation system of the same mode i s operating a comparable service without first purchasing said existing system through (2) The authority is granted the authe
INTERGOVERNMENTAL PIIOGRAMS Cit. 183 ma;ority vote of its membership include such terr itory h its regional trans-partation area. .....,. ......... Ch. I. d\ 1'3--278. PART VI ADVISORY COUNCIL ON iNTERGOVERNMENTAL RELATIONS 163.701 163.702 163.703 163.704 163.705 \63.7055 163.708 ShO
Cll. 343 COMMUTER RAIL AND CENTRAL FLORIDA REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY F.S. 1993 ers o f bonds authorized by this part. Th e state f u r ther pledges that it will in any way impair the rights or remedies of the holders of such bonds unlit the bonds together with inter est thereon, are fuily paid and dis charged. Hlleoty.-J.. t, ell 351. 343.61 343.62 343.63 343.64 343.65 343.66 343.67 343.68 PART II CENTRAL FLORIDA REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY ShOf't title Del l nitions Cenlral Florida Regional Transpflalion Aulhor ity. Powe r s and duties. I ssuance of reve01Je bonds Bonds not debts or p ledges of cred i t o f stale. Ptedg.e to bondholders not to restrict certain rights of authOrity. Applicability to other l aws. 343.61 Short title.-This part may be c i ted as the 'Cen tral F!Oiida Regional T ransportation A uthQf'i ty Act." Hlttory,-$ I ch. S I c;h, 90-101 343.62 Detinitions. As usad in thi s part. un l ess t h e context clea rt y indicates otherwise. the ter m : (1} Autho ri ty means the Cen t ral Flocida R egional Transportation Authotity. (2} "Board" means the go,,.erning body of the author ity. (3} commuter rai l r oad" means a comple t e sys t em of tra ck$ stations, park ing faci l i ties and rolling stock necessary to effectua t e medium-distance to long distance passenge r rai l service to or from the surround ing regional municipa lities. (4) Member" means the indtvidua l s constituting the board. (5) "Public tra n sportation' means transportation of Qc;>OdS and passenge r s lor h i re. as a charter service or w 1thout charge, by means, witho u t t imita tio n of a stre e t railway, elevated rai lway Of' iixed guideway commuter railroad, subway motor vehide, motor bus, and any bus. t ruck. or other means ot conveyance operating as a common car r ier or (6) "Public transpor t ation means property, equ i p ment, or buildings that are acquired. built. Installe d or established tor pub lic transportation sys tems. (7) "Public transpartalion system means withou t limitati on a. com.bination of real and personal PfOperty Improvements. buildings, terminals, parking rac1htes. equ1pment. plans. and rights-of-way, public rail and fix.ed guideway transportauon f a c i lit i es. rail or fixed gu i deway access to, from, or between other tran s portation te r m i nals and commoter r a i l roads and com muter rail facilities or any combinat i on 1hereof Of addttion !hereto, US
F.S. 1993 COMMUTER RAIL AND CENTRAL FLORJDA REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION AIJTliORITY Ch. 343 (b) To adept and use a eotpc
Ch. 343 COMMUTER RAIL AND CENTRAL FLORIDA REGI ONAL TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY F.S. 1993 s tat e further p tedgas that I t w ill not i n any way impair the r i ghts Of remed ies of the hol ders of such bonds until the bonds. tog e th er with int erest th ereon. are fully pai d and d ischarged. 1,
This is a blank page
This is a blank page
APPENDIX G: SAMPLE GOALS, OBJECTIVES, AND POLICIES SAMPLE GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES THAT SUPPORT TRANSIT The goals, objectives and policies in the local comprehensive plan provide the policy framework for coordinating land use and transit decisions. Below are some sample goals, objectives and policies tha t could be incorporated into a local comprehensive plan to establish the groundwork for a transit-friendl y development program. I The following model goals, objectives and policies that support transit were adapted from the publication A Guide to Land Use and Public Transportation Volume ll: Applying the Concepts, SNO-TRAN 1993. Goal: Develop a road system that facilitates transit, cycling, and walking, as well as driving. Objective: Develop a regional network of interconnected arteria l collector, and local roads to serve existing and planned land uses. Policy: The (local government) shall work with (other local governments), the MPO, and the state DO T to establish a grid network of through-roads that link neighborhoods shopping, employment sites, parks, recreational activities, schools and public services Policy: Greater priority shall be placed on tranSPortation improvement projects that link complementary land uses. Policy: Amend zoning and subd iv ision r egulations to reqUire connected streets and discourage the excessive use of cu i -d e-sacs, dead ends, and loops. Objective: Make roads safe and convenient for bicy clists and pedestrians. Policy: Sidewalks shall be requi r ed wherever feasible on both sides of all arterial and collector roads withi n (designate districts or activity centers). In other areas shoulders shall be wide enough to safe l y accommodate pedestrians. APPENDIX G: SAMPLE GOAl-S, OBJECTIVES, AND POLICIES
PENSACOLA URBANIZED ARLI TRANSIT IMPROVEMENT STRATEGY Policy: Critical gaps in the existing sidewalk network shall be identified and a program shall be developed to fill such gaps. Objective: Develop a public transportation system that allows people to conveniently travel between and within regional and local activity centers. Policy: The (local government) shall work actively and cooperatively with the (other local governments), State DOT, the MPO, and the transit provider in planning regional and county-wide transportation systems and locating sites for public transportation facilities. Policy: The (local government) shall work with the (transit provider) to link and provide circulation within these activity centers. Goal: Develop compact, attractive city and town centers that can be linked by a variety of transportation modes. Objective: Promote growth in urban activity centers, while discouraging growth outside activity center areas. Policy: Identify activity centers and support investment and development in these c enters. Policy: Provide developers with incentives to develop in designated urban activity c.enters Policy: Encourage redevelopment and in-fill of underdeveloped land in activity center areas. Policy: Encourage a pedestrian-oriented mix of housing, businesses commercial services, open space and cultural attractions in existing and planned activity centers. APPENDIX G: SAMPLE GOALS, OBJECTIVES, AND POLICIES
APPENDIX G: SAMPLE GOALS, 0BJECTWES, AND POLICIES II. The following objectives and policies were adopted by the City of Orlando and appear i n the Mass Transit Element of the Orlando Growth Management Plan, 1991. Goal 3 : To encourage the inclusion of multi-modal transit and ridesharing facilities in new developments and roadway improvement projects and to ensure accessibil i ty to all transit users. Objective 3.1 : All new public transit systems, facilities and services in the C i ty of Orlando shall be designated and operated to provide accessibility to all segments of the community by 1991. Policy 3.1.3 : The City shall make provisions for transit passenger conven i ence by: Participat i ng i n and supporting an information program which acquaints travelers with transit routes and services available; Providing weather protection for transit users along major trans i t routes; Provid i ng clear signag e which ident i fies transit stops; and Advocating a more direct bus routing if necessary in order to extend service to major residential areas and traffic generators Policy 3 1.4: Internal public transit and pedestrian systems in metropolitan activity center s shall be designed and operated t o facilitate transfer of passengers to and from the regional transit system. Policy 3 1.5.: The City shall amend its Land Development Code to require that site plans for primary and secondary transfer centers and ancillary facilities have: Full accommodation for pedestrian access and movement; Full accommodation for bicycles including lockers and racks ; Well designed provision for transfer of passengers; Well designed access for motor vehicles for passenger drop-offs; Full accommodation for the mobility i mpaired including parlting spaces for handicapped access; and Provide weather protect i on for transit users at primary transit routes. APPENDIX G: SAMPLe GOALS, OBJECTIVES, AND POLICIES
PENSACOLA URBANIZED AREA TRANSIT IMI'ROYEME/YT STRATEGY Objective 3.2 : By January I, 1992 the City shall within the Land Development Code establish standards for accessibility to public transit and pedestrian systems. Such standards shall apply to new developments, substantial enlargements and substantial improvements and substantial improvements of existing developments, and road improvements. Policy 3 2.1: The City shall require site and build ing design on new developments within ihe transit service area and all Developments of Regional Impact to be coordinated with pub l ic transit and pedestrian systems. Requirements may i nclude, but shall not be limited to, pedestrian access to transit vehicles, transit vehicle access to buildings, bus pull-offs, and transfer centers. Policy 3.2 2: The City shall require that new development be compatible with and further the achievement of the Mass Transit Element. Requirements for compatibility shall include but are not limited to: Orienting pedestrian access to transit center s and existing and planned transit routes. Locating parking in back of the development to provide accessibility of building entrances and walkways to the street, rather than separation of the building from the street by parking. Policy 3.2.3: The City shall eliminate on-street parking from thoroughfares as required to enable the development of i n ternal public transit and pedestrian systems within metropolitan activity centers. Policy 3.2.4 : The City shall require that transit facilities, such as turn-out bays and transit shelter locations be included in the roadway design p r oposals. Policy 3.2 .5: The City shall ensure that transfer centers and park-and-ride lots are designed to be uti.lized by bicyclists. The thoroughfare system providing access to these centers and lots should allow for safe and adequate bicycle use APPENDIX G: SAMPLE GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES
This is a blank page
APPENDIX H: SOURCES OF ADDITIONAL INFORMATION SOURCES OF ADDITIONAL INFORMATION A Guide to Land Use and Public Transportation for Snohomish County, Washington (The Snohomish County Transportation Authority, Volume II: Applying the Concepts. December 1993) a guidebook building u pon volume I by providing more specific planning, design and regulatory strategies to assist communities in achieving transit compatible land use. Includes helpful guidance to smaller communities. For a copy of this report, write to SNOTRAN, 5800 !98th Street, S. W. #A-2, Lynnwood, WA 98036. A Guide to Land Use and Public Transportation for Snohomish County, Was hington (The Snohomish County Transportation Authority. December 1989) a guidebook to assist communities in achieving transit compatible land use and subdivision design. Includes helpful guidance to smaller communities. For a copy of this report, write to SNOTRAN, 5800 !98th Street, S. W. #A-2, Lynnwood, WA 98036. Access by Design: Transit's Role in Land Development A Developer's Manual (Maryland Department of Transportation, Mass Transit Administration. September 1988) includ es standards, guidelines and checklists for design of transit, turnout bays, turnarounds, shelters, signs, lane widths, grades, intersections, and bus stop spacing. Available from the Maryland Department of Transportation, Mass Transit Administration. Creating Transportation Choices Through Zoning: A Guide for Snohomish County Communities (Prepared by The Snohomish County Transportation Authority. October 1994) a guide for making a local zoning code more transit and pedestrian friendly. For a copy of this report, write to SNO-TRAN, 1133-!64th St. S.W., Lynnwood Washington 98037. Development Incentives that Support Transit (Center for Urban Transporta tion Research, University of South Florida. Prepared for Tri -County Commuter Rail Authority. June 1994) This report reviews transportation concurrency management systems within the Tri-Rail serv ice area and proposes remedies for regulatory barriers to transit in local concurrency manage ment systems. Available from the Center for Urban Transportation Research, USF College of Engineering, 4202 E, fowler Avenue, ENB 118, Tampa, Florida, 33612 (free). APPENDIX H: SOURCES OF ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
PENSACOLA URBANIZED AREA TRANSIT IMPROVEMENT STRATEGY Mode Enhancement tbrougb Land Use Design: Development Design Strategies to Encourage the Use of Alternative Transportation Modes. (Prepared for The County of San Diego Department of Planning and Land Use and prepared by Stevens/Garland Associates, Inc in association with SR Associates and Comsis. July 9, 1991) includes sample plan policies and a range of planning and transportation demand management strategies to promote alternative modes of transportation. Also reviews the County of San Diego's zoning and subdivision ordinances and proposes regulatory changes. Copies available from Stevens/Garland Associates, Inc., 505 City Parkway West, Suite 900, Orange CA 92668 AlTN: MELD Report ($28). Model Land Development & Subdivision Regulations tbat Support Access Management for Florida Cities and Counties (Williams, K., D. Rudge, G. Sokolow, and K. Eichin. Prepared by the Center for Urban Transportation Research, University of South Florida and the Florida Department of Transportation. January 1994) includes model regulatory language and standards for transit access. Available from the Florida Department of Transportation, Systems Planning Office, 605 Suwannee St., MS 19, Tallahassee, FL 32399-0450 (free, send self-addressed envelope). Moving People In Florida: Transit, TDM, and Congestion (Center for Urban Transportation Research. University of South Florida. May 1994) reviews a range of transportation alternatives that relieve traffic congestion by moving more people in fewer vehicles. These include various forms of public transportation, as well as transportation demand management (TOM) strategies that can be applied to reduce single occupant vehicle travel. Topics addressed include measuring effectiveness, congestion management systems, and how to make transit and TOM succeed. The report concludes with thirty-four recommendations for improving public policy and transportation practice. Available from tb.e Center for Urban Transportation Research, USF College of Engineering, 4202 E Fowler Avenue, ENB 118, Tampa, Florida, 33612, tel: 813-974-3120 (free). Planning for Transit-Friendly Land Use: A Handbook for New Jersey Communities. (New Jersey Transit. June 1994) -An excellent guidebook on achieving transit-friendly land use that addresses issues ranging from land use planning to site design. Winner of the 1994 Public Education Award, New Jersey Chapter of the Amer i can Planning Association. Available from New Jersey Transit, One Penn Plaza East, Newark, NJ 07105-2246, tel: 201-491-7000 (free). APPENDIX H: SOURCES OF ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
APPENDIX H: SOURCES OF ADDinONAL /NFORMAnON Recommendations for Pedestrian, Bicycle and Transit-Friendly Development Ordinances. (Transportation Rule Working Group, Oregon Chapter American Planning Association in coordination with the Oregon Department of Land Conservation and Development and the Oregon Department of Transportation. Working Draft. February 1993.) This report provides guidance in updating development ordinances to promote bicycle and transit-friendly development. Includes model regulatory language and standards for reduced parking building orientation, sidewalk widths, redevelopment of parking lots and other issues. Available from the American Planning Association-Oregon Chapter, David M. Siegel, AICP President, Salem Public Works Department, 555 Liberty St., SE, Room 325, Salem, OR 97301-3503 (free). Tbc Role of Level of Service Standards in Florida's Growth Management Goals (Center for Urban Transportation Research. University of South Florida. October 1993) This report reviews level of service (LOS) standards and measures developed in response to Florida's concurrency mandate, including a detailed summary of inoovative approaches to measuring LOS in five local governments. Available from the Center for Urban Transportation Research, USF College of Engineer ing, 4202 E. Fowler Avenue, ENB 118, T ampa, Florida, 33612 tel : 813-9743120 (free). The Subdivision and Site Plan Handbook (Listokin, D. and C. Walker. Rutgers : The State University of New Jersey. 1989) the definitive sourcebook on subdivision and site design and subdivision regulation. Available from the Center for Urban Policy Research, Rutgers University Building 4051, Kilmer Campus, New Brunswick, New Jersey 08903 ($54 95). Transportation for Livable Communities: A Powerful New Approach to Transportation Policy (Briggs, L. and R. Bradley. Prepared for the Business Transportation Council. 1993) overview of the new federal policy push for livable communities through transit-friendly design. Available from the Business Transportation Council, 915 15th Street, NW, Suite 600 Washington, DC 20005 (free). APPENDIX H: SOURCES OF ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
This is a blank page